MR. NAYANANANDA DASH,MEMBER -
Deficiency in service in respect of non-disbursement of sanctioned loan amount are the allegations arrayed against Ops.
2- Briefly narrating the Complaint which reveals that complainant is a small farmer having an agricultural land and to maintain his family was enrolled himself as a member of Akhua Dakhini Service Co-Operative Societies Ltd. by paying the required membership fees on 12/07/2014. Complainant to avail an agricultural loan applied to Ex-Secretary, Sarojkanta Swain(OP No.5). Accordingly complaint opened an Account in the Mini Bank bearing Account No.- 1802135 with Registration No.- 2649. The Mini Bank issued the Pass Book and cheque book containing 10 nos. of cheques bearing No. from 464661 to 464670 and the said Secretary sanctioned an agriculture loan of Rs. 39,000/- including Rs. 4,000/- as Insurance premium, but did not disburse the loan amount to the complainant. These deliberate and international non-disbursement of sanctioned loan caused serious mental agony and financial loss to the tune of Rs. 20,000/-. The matter was also reported to the higher authorities. Hence the complaint before the Forum with prayer that a direction may be given to disburse the loan amount of Rs. 39,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- for mental agony.
3- Being Noticed Op no.1 Biswajit Barik, Secretary, Akhua dakhini PACS appear into the case and filed written statement that, Op No.1 takes over the charge on dtd.4/6/2015 from his predecessor Sri Sarojkanta Swain and at present chief Executive Akhua dakhini PACS. Sri Sarojkanta Swain the predecessor has not yet handed over the records & register of the PACS to OP No.1 till date. It is revealed from the written statement that from the available records it is found that the Complaint is a member of the Society bearing No.-2649 and his kissan Credit card code No- 180902135. It is also revealed from the loan ledger- register, the credit limit in support of the sanction of the loan, the cheque issue register on the issue of cheques to the loanees have not been maintained upto date for which the details of the “kharif Loan” of the complainant could not be verified, it is further reveled that from the crop insurance register of loans Sept-2014 available in the Office of the Society and it is detected that the complaint Prasanta Panda, S/o- Keshab Charan Panda of vill- Parakula has been financed with Rs. 39,455/- during “ Kharif season 2014” for cultivation of 1.05 hector of land and sum Rs.888.00 has been paid towards crop insurance fee. The claim of the complainant for not receiving kharif loan for 2014 can be well proved from his KCC Pass Book his cheques at the Branch of Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd, At- Marshaghai Branch, Marshaghai and the rough cash Book of the receipt of the loan and the intimation (Form No.17) copy issued to the society by the Bank. Op No.2 Jaladhar Biswal, President, Akhua dakhini PACS and filed written version where nothing new is averred but same is a copy of the written statement of Op no.-1, which needs no elaboration.
Op No.3,4 & 6 though received the copy of the Notice but not preferred to appear to the dispute, hence said ex-parte by this Forum. Upon Notice OP No.5 Sri Sarojkanta Swain the Secretary, Akhuadakhini PACS and at present working as supervisor under the Cuttack Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. at- Marshaghai Branch appeared through his ld. Counsel and filled the written statement in the dispute, denying the allegation and in parawise reply it is averred that amount of Rs. 39,000/- was never sanctioned in favour of the complainant by Akhuadakhini PACS and the Op no.5 has no knowledge whether cheque No-464661 to 464760 was issued the complainant and Op No.5 has not received any cheque from the complaint. In the facts of the case it is averred that complaint is not a cultivator and has no landed property in his name and Complaint has never applied for any loan accordingly sanctioning of loan to the complaint does not arise at all. It is further averred that a loan amounting of Rs. 39,000/- was sanctioned in favour of one Prasanta Panda of Village Raghapur which also situated within the limit of Akhua dakhini PACS and complaint being a mischievous person and identified himself as a said Prasanta Panda and making false representation enter the sanction amount made in favour of Prasanta Panda of village Raghapur in his Pass book. It is also revealed from the written version that, when such mistake came to the knowledge of this Op and authorities of the Mini Bank, Complaint was informed to deposit his Pass Book for necessary correction. But since then the complainant did not turn up and filed this false case to Black mail the Society and Bank for which the complaint devoid of merit and his liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard the Complaint, who appeared personally and case of the Op No.1,2 & 5 on merit and ex-parate hearing against Op no.3,4&6 and perused the documents filed in to the dispute. The only admitted fact of the case is that Complainant Prasanta Kumar Panda is a Member of Akhu dakhini Co-Operative Society. The complaint is filed before this Forum on allegation of non-release of sanctioned loan amount of Rs. 39,000/- under Kisan Credit card Yojana. Complainant to substantiate his case filed self attested Xerox copy of Pass Book, money receipt of membership, Front page of the cheque book and list of loanees. On the other hand the contesting Ops i.e, Op No.1,2 only filed the written statement no documents were produced on their behalf. On examining the written statement the version of the Op No.1&2 are contracting to the version of Op No.5. Op No.1 is the present Secretary and C.E.O, Akhua dakhini Co-Operative Society and Op No.2 is the President, of the said Society and Op No.5 Saroj Kanta Swain is the then Secretary of Society, who is at present working as supervisor under Cuttack Central Co-Operative Bank, Marshaghai Branch. Op No.1&2 state that as per the Crop insurance register of Kharif loans Sept-2014, Complainant was sanctioned a loan amounting of Rs. 39,455/- which is supported from the copy of the Agricultural loan sheet produced by the Complainant. On the other hand Op no.5, the then Secretary denies the allegations and states that one Prasanta Kumar Panda of Vill- Raghapur, was sanctioned with the said amount of agricultural loan for Kharif 2014-15 not the present complainant. OP No.5 further states that Complainant mischiefly entered the amount in his loan pass-book and Op no.5 has no knowledge regarding issue of cheque book to complainant bearing No-464661 to 464770.
In the circumstances, it is our unanimous view that the present allegations of the complainant need a through investigation and requires elaborate evidence to decide the fate of the case. In addition to that when the OP No.5 clearly admits that, the Complainant Prasanta Kumar Panda, S/o- Keshaba Charan Panda of village Prakula was never sanctioned any loan in his favour and when the mistake of wrong entry in respect of sanctioned of loan is detected information was given to the complainant to deposit his Pass-book for necessary correction and in the light of submissions it appears that complainant is neither a loanee under the sanctioned loan of Kharif-2014, nor the sanctioned amount has been disbursed to the complainant-loanee. We cannot give any direction to Ops to regarding sanction and release of the loan amount equally, complainant is not liable to pay in loan dues as the sanctioned loan if any has not been disbursed. If the complainant is having any grievance, same can be put forth before the higher authorities of the Op- Society and the complainant is at liberty to take lawful action against the defaulting officials, who are intentionally harashing complainant like member and indulged in corrupt and mischievous activities by taking unreasonable pleas. Further in our opinion Op no.1,3,4 & 6 when remained absent from the proceeding truth of the allegation is not prevailed and it was the bounden duty of those officials to look in to the allegation and to disclose the fact before this Forum, in their absence fate of the complaint can not be decided.
With aforesaid observations, we disposed of the Complaint without any cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 25th day of February, 2017.
