DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.462 of 06-10-2010

Decided on 30-03-2011

Darbara Singh, aged about 63 years, son of Sh.Bachan Singh, r/o village Wara Bhai Ka, Tehsil Jaito, District Faridkot.

.......Complainant

Versus

1. Manager, State Bank of India, Kikar Bazaar, Bathinda.

2. Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Sector-17, Chandigarh.

3. Managing Director, State Bank of India, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai

......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Dr.Phulinder Preet, Member.

Sh.Amarjeet Paul, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh.Sandeep Singh, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.Anil Gupta, counsel for opposite party No.1.

Opposite party Nos.2&3 already exparte.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant took personal loan from the opposite parties through the opposite party No.1. For this, the opposite party No.1 opened loan account of the complainant bearing No.01593006451 dated 25.08.2001. At the time of taking the above said loan, the complainant was doing his job at Guru Nanak Dev Thermal Plant, Bathinda and was residing at C-136, Thermal Colony, Bathinda. Thereafter, the complainant was transferred to Guru Hargobind Thermal Plant, Lehra Mohabat, Distt. Bathinda and left the Quarter given by his Department at Bathinda. The complainant retired from his service in July 2006 and he started residing at his native village Wara Bhai Ka, Distt. Faridkot and he duly intimated the opposite party No.1 about the changes in his address. The complainant was repaying the said loan amount through monthly installments of Rs.3,510/- to the opposite parties. The opposite party No.1 got issued a post-dated cheque of Rs.3,510/- bearing No.361594 dated 04.12.2004 drawn on State Bank of Patiala, GNDTP Branch, Bathinda from his account No.01190006419. The said cheque was presented for encashment but it was returned unpaid with remarks “Insufficient Funds” vide memo dated 06.12.2004 to the opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 got issued a legal notice dated 14.12.2004 u/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act to the complainant and sent it to him through registered post on his previous address. The legal notice was returned back with the remarks that addressee does not reside at the given address. The complainant did not have any knowledge about dishonor of the said cheque and filing of complaint etc. by the opposite party No.1. The complainant depositedRs.30,000/-on 28.12.2004, Rs.20,000/-on 01.03.2005 and Rs.30,000/- on 11.07.2005 with the opposite parties in his loan account. On 01.08.2005, the complainant went to the opposite party No.1 to settle his loan account and paid total outstanding amount of Rs.29,884/- and cleared his loan account. The complainant deposited Rs.30,000/- with the opposite party No.1 on 28.12.2004. At that time, he was not informed about dishonor of his cheque & issuance of legal notice to him. Even after his depositing Rs.30,000/-, a complaint u/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act was filed against the complainant by the opposite party No.1 vide file No.42 dated 28.01.2005 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda with malafide intention to extort money through blackmailing and harassment. In the said complaint, the opposite party No.1 intentionally mentioned wrong address of the complainant as knowing that the complainant was not residing at that address. The said loan was settled on 01.08.2005 but the opposite party No.1 did not withdraw the above said complaint and regularly got issued summon, bailable warrants and non-bailable warrants from the Court against the present complainant. On 08.04.2009, the Hon'ble Court of Sh.H.L.Kumar, Special Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Bathinda ordered to issue proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. against the complainant so that he may be declared as Proclaimed Offender. The complainant many times visited and requested the opposite party No.1 to issue No Due Certificate but the opposite party No.1 postpone the matter on one or the other pretext. When, the complainant went to opposite party's Bank in the month of February 2009 and inquired, he came to know that there was some bungling with his loan account and the amount of Rs.29,884/- deposited by him on 01.08.2005 has not been credited in it. The complainant traced the deposit voucher of above said amount of Rs.29,884/-, got it put up before the Manager, Personal Loans and requested him to make the requisite credit in his account but the said amount of Rs.29,884/- was not credited in his loan account. The complainant submitted applications to the Higher Authorities then the opposite party No.1 issued Clearance Certificate to the complainant on 26.05.2009 but they did not provide the statement regarding his loan account. Hence, the complainant has filed this complaint.

2. The opposite parties have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the complainant neither informed the opposite parties regarding his transfer to Guru Hargobind Tehrmal Plant, Lehra Mohabbat nor gave intimation with regard to his retirement or staying at his native village Wara Bhaika, as alleged. The opposite parties have denied that the opposite party No.1 was aware of the change in address of the complainant. The opposite party sent the notice on the address given by the complainant himself. The amounts deposited by the complainant, were duly credited in his loan account on the same day. The cheque of Rs.3,510/- bearing No.361594 dated 04.12.2004 issued by the complainant, was dishonored and returned unpaid with the remarks “Insufficient Funds” vide memo No.06.12.2004. Thus, the complainant committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and as such, the opposite party No.1 had rightly filed complaint vide file No.42 dated 28.01.2005 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda against the complainant. The opposite parties have denied that there was any bungling with the loan account of the complainant. The amount of Rs.29,884/- deposited by the complainant on 01.08.2005 was duly credited in his loan account on the same day. The opposite party No.1 never demanded Rs.10,000/- from the complainant for withdrawing the complaint.

3. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. The counsel for the complainant submitted that he has obtained personal loan from the opposite parties through opposite party No. 1. At the time of taking the above said loan, the complainant was doing his job at Guru Nanak Thermal Plant, Bathinda and was residing in C-136 Thermal Colony, Bathinda, thereafter, he was transferred to Guru Hargobind Thermal Plant, Lehra Mohhabat, Bathinda and accordingly he left his quarter given by Government at Thermal Colony Bathinda. The complainant retired from his service in July 2006 and started residing at his native village Wara Bhai Ka District, Faridkot. The complainant was repaying the said loan amount through monthly installment of Rs. 3510/- to opposite party No. 1. The opposite party no. 1 got issued a post dated cheque of Rs. 3510/- bearing No. 361594 dated. 04.12.2004 drawn on State Bank of Patiala, GNTP, Bathinda from his account No. 01190006419. The said cheque was presented by the opposite parties for encashment without informing the complainant and the same was returned unpaid with the remarks “Insufficiant Funds” vide memo dated 06.12.2004 to the opposite party No. 1.

6. The opposite party No. 1 also got issued a legal notice dated 14.12.2004 U/S 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act to the complainant and sent it to him through registered post on his previous address i.e. C-136, Thermal Colony, Bathinda. Despite, being fully aware about the change in address of the complainant, the legal notice was returned back with a remark that the addressee does not reside at the given address. The complainant did not have any knowledge about dishonour of said cheque and filing of complaint by opposite party No. 1. The complainant deposited Rs. 30000/- on dated 28.12.2004, Rs. 20000/- on dated 01-03-2005 and Rs. 30000/- on dated 11-07-2005 with the opposite parties in the loan account No. 01593006451 towards re-payment of the loan amount. Finally on 01.08.2005, the complainant went to opposite party No. 1 to settle his loan account and paid total outstanding amount of Rs. 29884/- and cleared his load account. When the complainant deposited Rs. 30000/- on 28.12.2004, he was not informed about dis-honour of his cheque and issuance of legal notice to him even after his depositing Rs. 30000/-. A complaint U/S 138 under Negotiable Instrument Act was filed against the complainant by the opposite party No. 1 vide file no. 42 dated 28-01-2005 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda. The complainant further alleged that the opposite party No. 1 intentionally mentioned wrong address of the complainant Darbara Singh fully aware of the fact that he was not residing at that address. The summons were issued on the wrong address and consequently returned unserved. The dispute of loan account was settled on 08.04.2009. The complainant many times visited the opposite party No. 1 and requested them to issue No Due Certificate regarding the loan account No.01190006419 but the opposite party No. 1 used to put up the matter on one or the other pretext. When the complainant went to the opposite party No. 1 in the month of February, 2009 and inquired, he came to know that there was some bungling in his loan account and amount of Rs. 29884/- deposited by him on 01.08.2005 has not been credited in it. The complainant then traced the deposited voucher of above said amount of Rs. 32884/- and showed it to the Manager and requested him to credit the amount in his account, but even then the amount was not credited in his loan account. The complainant further alleged that the opposite party No. 1 is demanding Rs. 10000/- from him for withdrawing the complaint and for issuing the No Due Certificate in favour of complainant. Ultimately, when the complainant approached the higher authority, the opposite party No. 1 issued No Due Certificate in favour of complainant on 23.05.2009. The employer of opposite party No. did not provide the complainant the account statement of loan account No. 01190006419 despite his repeated requestes and the same has been issued on 10.06.2009 and after withdrawl of complaint U/S 138 against him.

7. The Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 1 has taken the preliminary objection that the present complaint is barred by limitation and is liable to be rejected on this score alone. At the time of advancing the loan, in August, 2001, the complainant disclosed himself to be resident of # C-136, Thermal Colony, Bathinda as he was doing job at GNTP,Bathinda. The opposite parties pleaded that the complainant never informed the opposite parties regarding his transfer to GHTP Lehra Mohabbat nor regarding his retirement or staying at his native village Wara Bhai Ka. The opposite party No. 1 admitted the fact that it got post dated cheque for Rs. 3510/- bearing No. 361594 dated 04-12-2004 drawn on State Bank of Patiala. When it was presented by opposite party No. 1 for encashment the same was returned unpaid with the remarks “Insufficient Funds” vide memo dated 06.12.2004. The opposite party No. 1 also got issued legal notice U/S 138 of the negotiable instrument act to the complainsnt and sent it through registered post on his address at C-136, Thermal Colony, Bathinda. The opposite party No. 1 has specifically denied that it was aware of the fact of the change of the address of the complainant. The complainant had never informed the opposite parties regarding the change of his address. The opposite party No. 1 also admitted the fact that the complainant had deposited Rs. 30000/- on 28.12.2004, Rs 20,000/- on 01.03.2005, Rs. 30,000/- on 11.07.2005 and Rs. 29,884/- on 01.08.2005. The amount deposited by the complainant were duly credited in his loan account on same date. The opposite party No. 1 has also denied that there was bungling with the loan account of complainant as alleged. The amount of Rs. 29,884/- deposited by complainant on 01.08.2005 was duly credited in his loan account on the same date and the Manager of opposite party No. 1 has never demanded Rs. 10,000 from the complainant.

8. The legal objection taken by opposite party No. 1 that complaint is time barred. With regard to this objection, the complainant has taken loan on 25.08.2001 and his cheque was dishonoured on 04.012.2004; Legal notice was issued by opposite party No. 1 on 14.12.2004 U/S 138 NI Act. Rs. 30000/- deposited on 28.12.2004, Rs. 20000/- on 01.03.2005 and Rs. 30000/- on 11.07.2005, Total outstanding amount was paid by complainant on 01.08.2005. The complainant was declared proclaimed U/S 82 of CRPC on 08.04.2009. The complaint U/S 138 NI Act was withdrawn on 30.05.2009. The clearance certificate to the complainant was issued on 23.05.2009. The account statement was issued to him on 10.06.2009. The complainant has filed the present complaint on 10.06.2010. Thus, there is continuous cause of action, since obtaining of loan till the issuance of the account statement, hence, this complaint is within limitation.

9. The main contention of the complainant is that the last installment was not credited in his account. It has been credited in his account after the lapse of 4 years i.e. 10-06-2009 and the clearance certificate was issued to him on 23-05-2009. The account statement dated 10-05-2009 was issued to the complainant after the withdrawal of the complaint U/S 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. This complaint was withdrawn on the statement of opposite party No. 1 as the full loan amount has already been paid by the complainant.

   The complainant had waited for the “No Due Certificate” for 4 years. The account statement showing the amount credited in his account was also supplied to him after the lapse of four year whereas all the payments were made in 01-08-2005. The complainant was entitled to the Clearance Certificate, No Due Certificate and account statement as soon as he deposited the loan amount.

10. Hence, in view of what has been discussed above, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Thus, this complaint is partly accepted with Rs. 10,000/- as cost and compensation on account of unnecessary litigation and harassment.

    The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned.

Pronounced

30-03-2011

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni) Presidet

(Dr. Phulinder Preet)

Member

(Amarjeet Paul)

Member