Kerala

Wayanad

CC/10/57

E Reghu Raj,Maniyil House,Anjukunnu P O,Mananthavady. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager,Wayanad Dist.Co.Operative Bank ,Panamaram. - Opp.Party(s)

K M Thomas

31 Jul 2010

ORDER


Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, WayanadConsumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad
Complaint Case No. CC/10/57
1. E Reghu Raj,Maniyil House,Anjukunnu P O,Mananthavady. ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. Manager,Wayanad Dist.Co.Operative Bank ,Panamaram. ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:
HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE ,PRESIDENTHONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW ,MemberHONORABLE MR. P Raveendran ,Member
PRESENT :

Dated : 31 Jul 2010
JUDGEMENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

 

By Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:-


 

The Complainant's case is that he availed a loan of Rs.4,00,000/- from the Opposite Party pledging title deed and other relevant documents. The extent of the land is only 1.03 acres. The debt became due and which was eligible for writing off under the debt relief and debt waiver scheme declared by the Central Government. The Opposite Party did not waive of the entire amount instead benefit of the scheme can be given if 75% of the total amount is paid by the Complainant. The entire loan amount is to be considered as the eligible amount that to be waived. It is a deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to write off the entire loan amount Rs.4,00,000/- with 14.5% interest along with cost.

2. The Opposite party filed version in short it is as follows:- The Complainant was issued a cash credit loan of Rs.4,00,000/- the extent of the land for which the loan amount issued was not to the 1.03 acres. The 1.03 acres as averred in the complaint was the extent of the land including the house. The loan was applied and issued for the maintenance 14.68 acres of land owned and possessed by the Complainant and his family. Since the extent of land property is beyond two hectors the eligibility of the complainant is for 25% of the debted sum and the same was intimated to the Complainant. The Complainant would have offered the benefit of the scheme if the Complainant closed the proportionate liability on their side. The Complainant is not entitled for any relief as offered in the complaint hence it is to be dismissed with cost.


 

3. The points in consideration are:-

  1. Whether any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

  2. Relief and cost.


 

4. Points No.1 and 2:- The Complainant filed proof affidavit, Exts.A1 to A5 are the documents produced. Opposite party also filed proof affidavit inter alia contenting the allegation of the Complainant. Ext.B1 to B15 are the documents produced for the Opposite Party.


 

5. The allegation of the Complainant is that the loan amount availed is eligible for to be written off under the debt waiver and debt relief scheme declared by the Central Government. Ext.B8 is the application dated 04.03.2005 the clause 7 of it reads that the extent of the land 1.03 acres includes the with dwelling house. In the application for cash credit accommodation in column No.17 the extent of area cultivate is 14.68 acres. According to the Opposite Party dwelling house of the premises in extent of 1.03 acres is deposited as security and the cultivation area is 14.68 acres. Ext.B13 is the letter given by the Complainant to the Opposite Party bank it is avered in the letter that 25% of the total loan amount which is to be written off for the other farmers and the same benefit could be extended to the Complainant if the other conditions satisfied. The documents produced by the Complainant shows that the Complainant belongs to the category of other farmers who is entitled for debt relief scheme for the 25% of the total amount. If the remaining portion of the 75% the loan amount is remitted by the Complainant. In this case the Complainant had not remitted the 25% of the loan amount and the benefit of the scheme is not extended to the Complainant. We are in the opinion that there is no merit in the reliefs prayed for.


 

In the result the complaint is dismissed, no order as to costs.


 

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 31st July 2010.


 

PRESIDENT: Sd/-


 


 

MEMBER : Sd/-


 


 

MEMBER : Sd/-


 


 

A P P E N D I X


 

Witness for the Complainant:

PW1. Reghu Raj. Complainant.

Witness for the Opposite Party:

OPW1. K.P. Radhakrishnan. Branch Manager, Sulthan Bathery District Co-operative Bank.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Certificate. dt:22.01.2010.

A2. Copy of Letter. dt:07.10.2005.

A3. Copy of Circular No. 41/2008. dt:05.06.2008.

A4. Copy of Letter. dt:07.08.2008.

A5. Pass Book.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:

B1. Letter of Continuity for Cash Credit.

B2. Project Report.

B3. Working Capital Requirement For Planters dt:15.5.2003.

B4. Letter of Renewal for Cash Credit Accounts. dt:13.09.05.

B5. Application for Cash Credit Accommodation. dt:13.09. 05.

B6. Application for Cash Credit Accommodation. dt: 07.02.05.

B7. Letter. dt:29.09.2008.

B8. Letter. dt:04.03.2005.

B9 series (5 numbers) Possession Certificate.

B10. Receipt. dt:01.02.2005.

B11. Letter. dt:26.09.05.

B12. Letter.

B13. Letter. dt:09.07.2008.

B14. Copy of Letter. dt:7.8.08.

B15. Copy of Letter. dt:24.10.2009.


[HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW] Member[HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran] Member