Kerala

Wayanad

CC/11/37

Annamma Varghese,Palachuvattil House,Munnanad PO,Cheramkodu Village,Neelgiri District,Tamilnadu. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Mnager,State Bank Of Travancore,Sulthan Bathery. - Opp.Party(s)

31 Jan 2012

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/37
 
1. Annamma Varghese,Palachuvattil House,Munnanad PO,Cheramkodu Village,Neelgiri District,Tamilnadu.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Mnager,State Bank Of Travancore,Sulthan Bathery.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE MR. K GHEEVARGHESE PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE MRS. SAJI MATHEW Member
 HONORABLE MR. P Raveendran Member
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

 

The complaint filed against the Opposite Party not waiving the agricultural loan complying to the Scheme of Debt Relief and Debt Waiver 2008 announced by the Government of India.


 

2. The Complainant is an agriculturist who availed loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Opposite Party Bank on 28.09.2004. The repayment of the loan schedule consists of 12 instalments. The loan became overdue in the year 2006. The benefit of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief 2008 is also considerable in the case of Complainant who comes within the fold of this scheme. The Complainant agriculturist was not given the favours of this scheme. The Complainant request the Opposite Party and higher authority as such Zonal Manager. the Complainant is denied of the benefit of the scheme how ever the plight of the Complainant remains unheard by the Opposite Party. The Complainant turned to be under the threats of Opposite Party with strong and hard measures would be taken against the Complainant to recover the amount. The Complainant received the notice from the Opposite Party on 11.09.2010 in such a tune of recovery proceedings would be initiated.


 

3. The denial of the benefit of the scheme to the Complainant is a deficiency in service. There may be an order directing the Opposite Party to pay sum of Rs.6,69,670/- the loan amount that would be write off under this scheme along with cost and compensation.


 

4. Opposite Party filed version in short it is as follows:- The Complainant availed agricultural term loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Opposite Party. The loan given to the Complainant was of long term loan and the repayment was to be in instalments of 7 years. The Complainant failed to repay the loan amount regularly and during this time the Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme announced by Government of India in 2008 came into force. An amount of Rs.2,01,535/- was credited in to the account of the Complainant as per the norms of scheme. The Complainant was eligible for the benefit of the scheme of the loan amount disbursed up to 31.03.2007 and became overdue on non re-payment as on 31.12.2007 and it is unpaid till 29.02.2008. The balance amount which was no written off are to be repaid by the Complainant. The Opposite Party is bound by the provision and norms of the Debt Relief and Debt Waiver Scheme of the Government of India and only eligible amount for the scheme Rs. 2,01,535/- was written off by the bank. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. The complaint is to be dismissed with cost.


 

5. The points in consideration are:-

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

          2. Relief and cost.


 

6. Points No.1 and 2:- The evidence in this case consists of the proof affidavit of the Complainant and Opposite Party. Oral testimony of the Complainant and also the Opposite party. The documents Exts.A1 to A7, X1 and X2 are also produced.


 

7. The case of the Complainant is that the loan amount availed by the Opposite Party in 2004 was liable to be waived off since the Complainant belongs to the category of small farmers who is entitle to get the benefits. It is admitted that the loan was availed in 2004 the Complainant's husband is examined as PW1. According to the Complainant the loan availed on 21.09.2004 categorized Kizan Gold Card (KGC) mentioned here after. The repayment of the loan amount was to be in instalments of 5 years according to the Complainant. The Complainant made the 1st instalments of repayment in 2005 the total amount of the loan availed comes in KGC Rs. 5,00,000/- and under equitable mortgage Rs.63,000/-. Ext.X1 series is the loan application in the scheme of KGC. The repayment of the loan to be in 84 months. According to the Complainant the period of repayment is 5 years and she has no knowledge of the repayment period is of 84 months. The Complainant however not produced the pass book to substantiate her contention. Ext.X2 also explains that the loan issued to the Complainant is KGC of pledging 3 acre 15 cents. The Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme 2008 gave clear direction that to be implemented for the relief and waiving of the loans it would have been disbursed up to 31.03.2007 and overdue is on 31.12.2007 and remaining unpaid until 29.02.2008. According to the Opposite Party the loan amount was to be repaid within a period of 7 years and the extract was made basing on it. The Complainant's case is that the entire loan amount availed in 2004 by the Complainant is to be written off. Whereas according to the Opposite Party and the documents produced the repayment of the loan amount was to be in a period of 7 years from the date of disbursement of loan. The Complainant is not eligible to get written off the entire loan amount under the Debt waiver and debt relief scheme 2008 by the Government of India. The debted sum that was liable to be waived that was due on March 2007. In the light of the inferences above the Complainant is not entitled to get the benefit of the debt waivers scheme for the entire loan amount availed. Admittedly the Opposite Party extended the benefits of the scheme and an amount of Rs.2,01,535/- was written off. The Complainant has not case that he was not issued of the pass book. It is evidenced by the Opposite Party that normally in the pass book the loan repayment mod would be specified. The pass book is not produced as in this case. The Opposite Party cannot be attributed with the deficiency in service in the loan transaction and the points are found accordingly.

In the result the complaint is dismissed no order as to cost.


 

Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 31st January 2012.

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

MEMBER : Sd/-

/True Copy/


 

PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.


 

A P P E N X I X


 

Witness for the Complainant:


 

PW1. P.P. Varghese. Agriculture.


 

Witness for the Opposite Party:


 

OPW1. V.T. Vinod. Manager, S.B.T, Sulthan Bathery.


 

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Copy of General Power of Attorney

A2. Copy of Lawyer Notice. dt:28.11.2008.

A3. Copy of Complaint. dt:03.03.2009.

A4. Copy of Notice. dt:11.09.2010.

A5. Notice. dt:18.01.2011.

A6. Notice. dt:09.06.2010.

A7. Notice. dt:01.09.2011.

Exhibits for the Opposite Party:


 

X1 series Copy of Application Form dt:22.08.2009.


 

X2 series. Copy of Application Form. dt:22.08.2009


 

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

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.