Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/1

Satish Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

N.K. Maheshwari

06 Jan 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

 Complaint No. :        01 of 2019

 Date of Institution:    01.01.2019

Date of Decision :       06.01.2020

 

Satish Kumar aged about 52 years son of Ram Sarup r/o W. No. 10, Opposite Nehru Park, Jaitu, Tehsil Jaitu, District Faridkot.

           .........Complainant

Versus   

1. Punjab National Bank, Branch Office at Jaitu, Teh-Jaitu, District Faridkot through its Branch Manager/Authorized Person.
2. Punjab National Bank, PNB House, SCO No.31-42, Bank Square, Sec-17-B, Chandigarh through its Authorized Person/ Manager.
3. Punjab National Bank, #7, PNB House, Bhikaji Cama Palace, New Delhi-110066 c/o Rajender Bhawan, Rajender Place, New Delhi, 110008 through its Managing Director/ Director/Manager/ Authorized Person.

                                                                         .............OPs

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

               Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present:  Sh Neeraj Maheshwary, Ld Counsel for Complainant,

               Sh Madan Lal Bansal, Ld Counsel for OPs.

cc no.- 01 of 2019

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                                Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to OPs to refund the amount of Rs.6,500/- and for further directing OPs to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service and harassment alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.5,500/-.

2                                              Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he has a saving account bearing no.0246000100099261with OPs bank  and he also holds loan account bearing no.024600JH00001393 under Pardhan Mantri Scheme, in which he has been paying regular instalments. It is submitted that due to inadvertence and some personal difficulties, he could not pay some instalments. It is submitted that in June, 2018 there were more than Rs.22,000/-in his saving account and he issued cheque worth Rs.20,000/-in the name of one of his relatives, who was in need of money, but Ops dishonoured his cheque due to less amount in his account. Thereafter, complainant approached OPs and asked about less balance, then he came to know that OPs debited Rs.6,500/-from his account without his prior permission and without any intimation to him. He made several requests to them to credit the said amount alongwith interest into his account, but OPs did not pay any heed to his genuine requests, which amount to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. All this act and conduct of OPs amounts to deficiency in service and trade

cc no.- 01 of 2019

mal practice and it has caused harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the complaint.

3                                              The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 07.01.2019, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the OPs.

4                                               On receipt of the notice, the OPs filed written statement wherein they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is no deficiency in service on their part. It is averred that complainant has levelled false allegations as he has concealed and suppressed the material facts from this Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands. It is averred that complainant availed loan from their bank under Prime Minister Mudra Yojna by stating wrong facts. Complainant is practising as an advocate, but he availed loan on the ground that he is unemployed. Being an advocate, he was not eligible for availing loan for the purpose of starting up any business, but complainant very cleverly managed to arrange loan on false grounds. Moreover, he has never been regular in making payment of instalments under said loan and intentionally did not repay the same. Despite repeated requests by OPs, he did not repay the defaulted instalments. It is further averred that since 13.09.2017,

cc no.- 01 of 2019

complainant did not pay any amount in his loan account and his account was irregular and was going to be NPA, but large amount was lying available in his saving account that clearly shows that complainant had some malafide intention due to which he was not depositing amount in his loan account on account of instalments due for loan availed by him. Therefore, OP-1 transferred the amount from his saving account to his loan account on 13.06.2018 and has every right and it is fully authorized to recover the defaulted amount from the complainant. Complainant never approached them and also did not pay any amount in his loan account for the six months. Complainant has levelled false allegations and tried to distort the facts. Complainant has levelled incorrect and false allegations with ulterior motive to gain undue advantage from them. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and asserted that complaint filed by complainant is false and frivolous and have also denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

5                                              Parties were given proper opportunities to prove their respective case. Counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-5 and then, closed their evidence.

6                                              In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Ld Counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of

cc no.- 01 of 2019

Kanwarjeet Singh Ex OP-1 and then, after availing sufficient opportunities, OPs did not conclude their evidence and therefore, evidence of OPs was closed by order of this Forum dated 16.12.2019.

7                                               We have heard the ld counsel for complainant as well as OPs and have carefully gone through evidence and documents placed on record by respective parties.

8                                               From the careful perusal of record and evidence and documents placed on record by respective parties, it is observed that case of the complainant is that he holds a saving account in the bank of OPs and his loan account is also running with OPs bank under Pardhan Mantri Scheme, but due to some personal difficulties, he could not pay some instalments of loan.  As per complainant, more than Rs.22,000/-were lying available in his saving account and he issued cheque worth Rs.20,000/-in favour of one of his relatives, but same was dishonoured due to less amount in his account. On enquiry from OPs, he came to know that OPs debited Rs.6,500/-from his account, which were transferred into his loan account. OPs debited this amount without his prior permission and without any intimation to him.  Grievance of the complainant is that despite making several requests to OPs to credit the said amount alongwith interest into his account, OPs did not do anything needful, which amount to deficiency in service. In reply, OPs have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted

cc no.- 01 of 2019

that complainant availed loan from their bank by concealing the real facts and by misstating before them that he is an unemployed person, but in reality he has been practising as an advocate and cannot do any business in his name without permission of State Bar Council, Chandigarh. Thus, complainant availed loan from their bank under Prime Minister Mudra Yojna by stating wrong facts. Complainant intentionally concealed that he is practising as an advocate and availed loan on the ground that he is unemployed. Being an advocate, he was not eligible for availing loan for the purpose of starting up any business, but complainant very cleverly managed to arrange loan on false grounds. Even, he has never been regular in making payment of instalments against loan availed by him and intentionally did not repay the same. Despite repeated requests, he did not repay the defaulted instalments and since 13.09.2017, complainant did not pay any amount in his loan account and his account was irregular and was going to be NPA. Large amount was lying available in his saving account but he was not depositing amount in his loan account against outstanding instalments. Therefore, OP-1 transferred the amount in question from his saving account to his loan account on 13.06.2018 and they have every right to do so. Moreover, OPs are fully authorized to recover the amount due towards complainant. Complainant neither approached them not did he pay any amount in his loan account for last six months. Allegations levelled by complainant are

 

cc no.- 01 of 2019

devoid of truth. It is reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and asserted that complaint filed by complainant is false and frivolous and have also denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorect and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

  9                                          Ld Counsel for OPs brought before the Forum that complainant is an advocate and he availed under Prime Minister Mudra Scheme from their bank by giving wrong statement that he is unemployed and availed the same for the purpose of starting business without permission of State Bar Council, but after availing the loan, he defaulted in repaying the instalments against said loan account. He had sufficient amount in his saving account but he deliberately did not make payment of instalments for last six months. His loan account became irregular and was going to be NPA though large credit was lying available in his saving account. OPs have every right to recover the loan amount and therefore, being fully authorized and competent to recover the defaulted payments, OPs debited the saving account of complainant and transferred the said amount to his loan account. They have made right transfer as per rules and regulations of Bank and there is no irregularity in it. Complainant was several times asked and requested to make payment of defaulted amount against loan availed by him but despite having sufficient balance in his saving account, he did not deposit the instalment against his loan account with them. There is no deficiency in service on

cc no.- 01 of 2019

the part of OPs. Ld counsel for complainant had nothing to say to contradict the allegations of opposite parties and it is also admitted that complainant availed loan from OPs bank and instalments against loan account have not been paid by him for long time.  Huge amount is still pending against loan account which has been admittedly not been paid by complainant. The complainant was duty bound to repay the instalments of loan on time regularly as agreed between the parties. But he failed to abide by the terms of loan agreement and did not repay the loan on time. Even  during the proceedings of present complaint, complainant did not show his any intention to repay the loan. The bank has every right to recover the loan amount from complainant by setting off the amount lying in the saving account of complainant. Thus, it is observed that OPs have done nothing wrong to save his loan account from becoming Non Performing Asset (NPA) and there is no illegality in it.

10                                    From the above discussion and evidence and pleadings put forward by parties, it is made out that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 to OP-3. Therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merits. However, in peculiar circumstances of the case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 6.01.2020

                                      (Param Pal Kaur)             (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                      Member                                   President