DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 27th day of December, 2018
C.D Case No. 38 of 2017
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Maa Tarini Chuda Mill
Prop: Balaram Rout,
S/o: Narayan Chandra Rout,
Vill/Po: Chadheya,
Ps: Bhadrak (R),
Dist: Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
1. Smt. Ranjita Nayak
W/o: Anil Nayak,
Proprietor: Gayatri Flour Mill, Charampa,
At present: Apartibindha (New Colony),
Po: Bhadrak,
Ps: Bhadrak (T),
Dist: Bhadrak
2. Branch Manager, Uco Bank, Jalanga Branch
At/Po: Jalanga,
Ps: Bhadrak (R),
Dist: Bhadrak
…………………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Mr. Rabindra Ku Ray, Adv
Counsel For the OP No. 1: None (Ex-parte)
Counsel For the OP No. 2: Mr. C. R. Nath, Adv
Date of hearing: 05.10.2018
Date of order: 27.12.2018
BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER
This dispute arose out of a complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
The facts of the complaint are to the effect that the complainant is an unemployed young man desired to start a Chuda Mill in his village at Chadheya and due to paucity of funds he contacted OP No. 2 Bank for financial assistance in shape of term loan. In order to comply the requirements of the bank, complainant obtained a quotation of machineries from Gayatri Flour Mill, Charampa, Prop. Smt. Ranjita Nayak, W/o Anil Nayak having present address at- Apartibindha (New Colony), Po: Bhadrak, Ps: Bhadrak (T), Dist: Bhadrak and submitted the same to OP No. 2 along with other documents for sanction of loan. On compliance of all required formalities, OP No. 2 sanctioned the loan and issued a demand draft for an amount of Rs 5,51,000/- in favour of proprietor, Gayatri Flour Mills, Charampa on dt. 07.04.2015 and directed OP No. 1 to supply and install the machines within a period of one month. When the supplier (OP No. 1) failed to supply the machineries within the scheduled period, complainant personally met OP No. 1 time and again and requested for supply of machineries OP No. 1 narrated difficulties showing the cause of delay in delivering the machines from Kolkatta and assured to supply the machines within a week but failed to do so. In this manner OP No. 2 went on deferring the dates for supply of machines on various pleas and being disappointed the complainant brought the facts in writing to the notice of OP No. 2 requesting an immediate action for supply of machineries by OP No. 1. But the OP bank did not take any exemplary step for yielding a positive result. The complainant ran from pillar to post to get the machines installed and due to non supply of machines by OP No. 1 and in action of OP No. 2 the complaint, being desperated served notice, through his advocate, upon OP No. 1 on 07.04.2017 to supply the machineries within a period of 7 days under intimation to OP No. 2 for immediate follow up action. When OP No. 1 did not respond and care for the legal notice the complainant was constrained to take shelter in this Forum for justice requesting a direction to OP No. 1 for supply of plant and machineries or refund of draft amount together with interest @ 2% more than what is charged by the bank on the loan amount along with cost and compensation.
OP No. 1 neither appeared before the Forum nor submitted written version for which she was set ex-parte. But OP No. 2 defended the claim of the complainant and contested the case. In submitting written version, OP No. 2 challenged maintainability of the case on the ground of no cause of action, barred by limitation and non-joinder of necessary party and mis-joinder of unnecessary party but has not specifically mentioned who are the necessary and unnecessary parties to the present case. In disclosing the actual fact the answering OP has stated that the complainant was a selected beneficiary under Prime Minister Employment Guarantee Program (PMEGP). Accordingly the DIC, Bhadrak sponsored a proposal for installation of a Chuda Mill and the complainant, in order to comply the requirements, submitted required documents including quotation obtained from OP No. 1 for the purpose of considering sanction of loan. On compliance of formalities, the answering OP sanctioned the loan and issued a demand draft bearing No. 460795 for Rs 5,51,000/- in favour of the supplier of machineries (OP No. 1) on the written request of complainant on dt. 07.04.2015. OP No. 1 was also instructed by OP No. 2 to supply Chuda Mill machines within the period of a month and when he failed to supply the machines, complainant intimated the fact of non-delivery of machines by OP No. 1 and on having the intimation from complainant, answering OP called for OP No. 1 to know the reason of non-delivery of machines. OP No. 1 expressed his difficulties orally and assured complainant and OP bank to complete the process of delivery of all machines as specified in the quotation letter within 07.09.2015. The non-delivery of project machines was not brought to the notice of this answering OP till the date of receiving legal notice from the complainant after expiry of more than one and half years from the date of last meeting held with the complainant and OP No. 1. This answering OP is also surprised as to why the complainant was silent on the matter for a party long period of more than one and half years which gives rise to doubt that there was collusion/nexus with each other (Complainant and OP No. 1) and filing this dispute is felt a conspiracy between them to harass and extract from answering OP. Hence the complaint does not bear any merit and liable to be dismissed with cost.
We have gone through the facts of the complaint, written version of OP No. 2, heard the parties participated in hearing, perused materials on record and observed as discussed below.
1. Admittedly the complainant is a beneficiary selected under PMEGP scheme for self employment and he opted for installation of a chuda processing unit (Chuda Mill) at Chadheya. Accordingly the DIC Bhadrak sponsored a project proposal to Uco Bank, Jalanga Branch for sanction of loan in favour of the complainant. The OP No. 2 (Bank) sanctioned the loan in favour of the complainant and also paid a sum of Rs 5,51,000/- to OP No. 2 in shape of demand draft on the request of complainant directing OP No. 1 to supply the machines within a month. The complainant claims the OP No. 2 failed to supply the machines within the stipulated date as mentioned in the supply order as a result of which complainant met the supplier time and again but did not yield any result only other than some assurances for supply of machines on different dates by OP No. 1. However, complainant has also intimated to OP No. 2 who asked the complainant to supply the machines and OP No. 1 being present there also assured with written undertaking to supply the machines unfailingly on or before dt. 02.09.2015 but failed to supply the machines as per her commitment. Thereafter complainant brought the fact of non-supply of machines by OP No. 1 as per commitment to the knowledge of OP No. 2 bank who turned a deaf ear to the grievance of the complainant as a result of which OP No. 1 got the scope not to supply the machines which gives a smell of nexus between both the O.Ps as if they have conspired to consume entire amount of the cost of machines jointly.
On the contrary OP No. 2 has rejected this allegation in stating that the complainant has not brought the facts of non-delivery of machineries by OP No. 1 to the notice of OP No. 2 for which the OP bank could not take any step for mounting pressure on OP No. 1 to deliver the machines or refund the D.D amount with interest to OP No. 2 bank. This silence of complainant for a pretty long time leads to believe that the complainant has received the machineries for Chuda Mill which was vehemently protested by the complainant in stating that OP bank has admitted at Para- 13 of the written version which proves the complainant has intimated OP No. 2 about non-delivery of the machines as per commitment. The plea taken by OP No. 2 is proved false and irrelevant in this context.
Perused the materials on record and found the complainant has intimated the fact of non-delivery of machineries to OP No. 1 and basing on such information OP No. 2 had called for OP No. 1 and the complainant where OP No. 1 made a firm commitment to deliver the machineries on or before 07.09.2015. The OP bank had not further made any query about the delivery of machines and not ensured end use of the loan advanced to the complainant by way of verifying proper utilization of loan. Such act of OP No. 2 leads to doubt that both the O.Ps have joined hands in an unholy intention to swindle away the draft amount. Hence the OP bank is believed as part of the conspiracy and has taken the advantage of the simplicity and ignorance of the complainant.
2. During hearing of the case the complainant submitted that prior to placing supply order along with demand draft for supply/delivery of machineries, OP No. 2 had also advanced a sum of Rs 2,00,000/- for construction of shed where the machines would be installed. Utilizing the loan more than 3.5 lakhs the complainant has made all required arrangements for installation of machines but due to non-delivery of machines, all the installment made for Chuda Mill became idle and did not generate any income as a result of which complainant sustained huge loss which should be augmented by waiving loan together with interest shown outstanding against the complainant. Moreover, despite repeated requests and persuasions, OP No. 2 did not take any exemplary step to recover the D.D amount of Rs 5,51,000/- which amounts to deficiency of service and proves it’s nexus with OP No. 1 to consume the cost of machines jointly. Further it is evident from the accounts statement that OP No. 2 has been charging interest and penal interest on the loan account comprising of shed, machineries and acquisition of other tools as capital components which did not yield any income for the complainant out of which he could have repaid the loan availed from the bank. The accounts statement furnished by the complainant also reveals that OP No. 2 has debited the loan account with Rs 6,742/- on 29.05.2016 towards premium of CGTSME which partly secures the said loan. It is also evident from the said accounts statement that the loan has become NPA under doubtful category and requires claim from CGTSME in order to lessen overdue loan burden which is not yet done by OP No. 2. It is also surprising that OP No. 1, being the permanent resident of Bhadrak Municipality and also carrying on business within Municipal area has intentionally avoided to appear before the Forum and even did not submit written statement which provides ample scope to believe that the said OP is a fraud and has not intentionally, with unholy intention, delivered the machines leaving the complainant to suffer financially, mentally and physically. Hence the OP No. 1 is found committed mischief in the matter of delivery the machines that amounts deficiency of service and unfair trade practice.
In view of the facts narrated above it is well proved that both the O.Ps have failed to provide proper service to the complainant with ulterior motive as a result of which a poor entrepreneur (Complainant) suffered a lot and sustained huge financial loss and mental agony for which both the O.Ps are equally or proportionately responsible and liable to augment the loss. Hence it is ordered; ORDER
The complaint be and the same is allowed against O.Ps. OP No. 1 is directed to refund the cost of machines of Rs 5,51,000/- together with interest @ 2% more than the rate of interest charged on the loan account of the complainant. OP No. 2, is directed to waive the loan so advanced under this scheme other than the cost of machinery as the said loan has become unproductive due to non-delivery of machines. OP No. 1 is also directed to pay Rs 5,000/- as cost of litigation and Rs 15,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.
This order must be complied within a period of 30 days failing which interest @ 9% shall be charged from the date of order till the date of payment.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 27th December, 2018 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
