Kerala

Wayanad

CC/08/97

Jose, S/o Ulahannan, Nelliyanikottu House, Pulinjal, Vellamunda Post, Wayanad - Complainant(s)

Versus

N U John, Manager North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda, Now Working as Divisional Manager, NMGB Tha - Opp.Party(s)

Adv. Babu Cyriac

31 Dec 2008

ORDER


CDRF Wayanad
Civil Station,Kalpetta North
consumer case(CC) No. CC/08/97

Jose, S/o Ulahannan, Nelliyanikottu House, Pulinjal, Vellamunda Post, Wayanad
Annamma, W/o Jose,Nelliyanikottu House, Pulinjal, Vellamunda Post
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

N U John, Manager North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda, Now Working as Divisional Manager, NMGB Thalassery
James Thomas, Senior Manager, North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda, Now Working at NMGB Thrikanad Branch, Uduma Post
North Malabar Gramin Bank Vellamunda, Vellamunda Post, Represented by its Present Manager, Sri.Chacko
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:
1. K GHEEVARGHESE 2. P Raveendran 3. SAJI MATHEW

Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




ORDER

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 Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:


 

The gist of the case is as follows.


 

The Complainants are husband and wife and they had availed agricultural loans from the Opposite Party's Bank. The 1st Complainant availed a loan of Rs.22,000/- vide loan account No. KC 350/2000 (REKC 137/05) and the 2nd Complainant availed loan of Rs.20,000/- vide loan account No.KC 435/2000, both in the year 2000, while the 1st Opposite Party was the Manager of the Bank. Both loans were renewed in the year 2005.
 

2. In the year 2007 due to financial difficulties the Complainant sold a part of their property and deposited a sum of Rs.90,000/- with the Opposite Party vide F.D. No.90/97 on 28.02.2007, while the 2nd Opposite Party was the Manager of the bank.
 

3. On 2.05.2007 the Bank has adjusted the fixed deposit amount to the loan account without the knowledge and consent of the Complainant. This was done by the 2nd Opposite Party. On 15.06.2007, on the advice of the Bank, the Complainant approached the Kerala State Debt Relief Commission for waiving their loan under Central Debt Waiver package. As per orders of Kerala Debt Relief Commission dated 04.04.2008 and 10.06.2008 the loans outstanding in the name of the Complainants were covered by the Central Debt Waiver package. On receiving the order, the Complainant approached the Bank for the relief as stated in the order. Then to the surprise of the Complainants, the Bank stated that they have already adjusted the fixed deposit to the loan. Due to the deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant has sustained loss, as they could not get the benefit of central debt waiver package. Therefore, the Complainants prays for an order directing the Opposite Parties to repay the F.D amount deposited by the Complainants in the Opposite Party's bank vide F.D No.90/07 with interest and to waive off the loan amount outstanding in the name of the Complainants under loan account No.KC 350/2000 (REKC 137/2005) and loan account No.KC 435/2000 (REKC 157/05). The complainant also prays for a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to be paid by the Opposite Parties.

4. The Opposite Parties filed their version admitting the agricultural loans given to the Complainants. They deny that the 1st Opposite Party was the Manager in charge of the Bank in 2000. They deny that the 1st Opposite Party had given loans to the Complainants and obtained several signatures even in blank papers. The Opposite Party stated that the 1st Complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.46,000/- vide F.D No.90/07 on 30.01.2007 as a fixed deposit for a period of 91 days in North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda Branch. The Complainant No.2 deposited a sum of Rs.54,000/- vide F.D No.91/07 on 30.1.2007 as a fixed deposit in the Opposite Party's Bank on 30.1.2008. The original F.D receipts vide No.90/08 and 91/07 were handed over to the parties concerned on the same day itself. It is not correct to say that the Complainants deposited a sum of Rs.90,000/- vide F.D No.90/07 as a fixed deposit in the Opposite Party's Bank on 28.02.2008 in the name of 1st and 2nd Complainants jointly. On 30.3.2007 the Complainant No.2 approached the bank and depositing the original F.D receipt No. 91/97 and on the strength of that document, she availed a L.D Loan for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. On 02.05.2007 the Complainant No.1 withdraw the F.D amount on production of the F.D receipt No.90/07. As per his demand the F.D amount was transferred and adjusted to his loan account number REKC 137/05. On the same day the Complainant No.2 also withdrew the F.D amount vide No. 91/07 and on her request the F. D amount was adjusted to the full settlement of the L.D loan No.36/07 and also the loan account No. REKC 157/05. The balance amount in the said F.D was received in cash by the Complainants. The 2nd Opposite Party was the Manager in-charge of North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda Branch during that period. The 2nd Opposite Party was acting on the request of the Complainants. The averment that the F.D amount was adjusted without the consent of the Complainant is not correct. The Complainants approached the Kerala Farmear's Debt Relief Commission on 15.06.2007 knowing fully well that there is no agricultural loan pending in the North Malabar Gramin Bank, Vellamunda Branch in the name of the Complainants. They are just desperate in not getting the loan waived and filed this complaint. This complaint has caused much hardship and harassment to the Opposite Parties who have performed their duties sincerely. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the side of the Opposite Parties and they pray for an order dismissing the complaint with compensatory cost to the Opposite Parties.

5. The Complainant No.1 were examined as PW1, and documents Ext.A1 to Ext.A4 were marked on the side of the Complainants. Opposite Party No.2 was examined as OPW1. Mr. Ramachandran. P.V, Clerk from the North Malabar Gramin Bank was examined as OPW2. Opposite Party No.3 was examined as OPW3. Documents Ext.B1 to Ext.B22 were marked on the side of the Opposite Party.


 

6. The matters to be decided are as follows.

  1. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.

  2. Whether the Complainants are entitled for any relief.


 

7. Point No.1:- In the complaint it is stated that the F.D is adjusted to the loan on 02.05.2007. It is only on 15.06.2007, the Complainants had approached the Kerala State Debt Relief Commission for waiving the loan after closing the loan account. Complainants contention is that the Opposite Parties have adjusted the F.D to the loan outstanding in the name of the Complainants without the knowledge and consent of the Complainants. But Ext.B5 and B7 are the fixed deposit receipts given to the complainants and returned to the bank when the deposit were adjusted to the loan. The Complainants have signed these documents. As per the Complaint the Complainants had deposited Rs.90,000/- as fixed deposit jointly. The complaint does not say anything about the loan of Rs. 10,000/- taken by the 2nd Complainant by depositing the F.D receipt No.91/07. The Opposite Parties produced loan documents to show that the fixed deposits were adjusted to the three loans in the name of the Complainants. After closing the loan accounts, the Complainant's have even received the balance amount (Ext.B11, ExtB13, Ext.B14). So, there is no basis in contenting that the F.Ds were transferred to the loan account without the knowledge and consent of the Complainant, the bank has duly acted in course of their duty in service of the customers. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Complainant and point No.1 is found against the complainant.

 

8. Point No.2:- As there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief.


 

Hence the complaint is dismissed.


 


 

Pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of December 2008.


 

PRESIDENT: Sd/-

 

MEMBER- I: Sd/-


 


 

MEMBER-II: Sd/-


 

A P P E N D I X


 

Witnesses for the Complainant:


 

PW1. Jose Complainant No.1.


 

Witnesses for the Opposite Party:


 

OPW1. James Thomas Senior Branch Manager, N.M.G.B,

 

OPW2. Ramachandran P.V Clerk, N.M.G.B.


 

OPW3. K.M. Chacko. Manager, N.M.G.B, Vellamunda.

Exhibits for the Complainant:

A1. Pass Book.

A2. Krishi Card.

A3. Receipt. dt:20.05.2008.

A4. Final Order. dt:04.04.2008.

A5. Final Order. dt:10.06.2008.


 

Exhibits for the Complainant:


 

B1.(4 sheets) Loan Agreement. dt:26.07.2000.


 

B2.(4 sheets) Loan Agreement. dt:21.08.2000.


 

B3. Agreement dt:02.02.2005.

B4.(6 sheets) Agreement. dt:05.02.2005.

B5. Fixed Deposit Receipt. dt:31.01.2007.

B6. Acknowledgment F.D Receipt (Certified copy)

B7. Fixed Deposit Receipt (No.91/07) dt:30.01.2007.

B8. Acknowledgment F.D Receipt (Certified copy)

B9. Application for Advance. dt:30.03.2007.

B10. Rear side of Fixed Deposit Receipt.

B11. Withdrawal Slip. dt:02.05.2007

B12. Rear side of Fixed Deposit Receipt.(No.91/07).

B13. Debit Slip. dt:02.05.2007

B14. Receipt. dt:02.05.2007.

B15. Credit Slip. dt:02.05.2007.

B16. Debit Slip. dt:02.05.2007.

B17. Credit Slip. dt:02.05.2007.

B18. Credit Slip. dt:02.05.2007.

B19. Credit Slip. dt:02.05.2007.

B20 (2 sheets) Certified Copy of Ledger extract (Page No.126)

B21.(2 sheets) Certified Copy of Ledger extract (Page No.166)

B22. True copy of Details submitted to Kerala State Agricultural Debt Relief Commission Thiruvananthapuram. dt:09.06.2008.


 




......................K GHEEVARGHESE
......................P Raveendran
......................SAJI MATHEW