HON’BLE SUDIP NIYOGI PRESIDENT FACTS The fact of this complaint, in short, is that the complainants who carry on business of tea leaf and earn their livelihood through the income of the said business, in order to expand their business wanted to take loan of Rs.1 crore from the Opposite Parties- Bank where they have already two accounts. Opposite Parties assured the complainants of providing loan and asked them to transfer their existing loans of Rs.30,00,000/- from HDFC Bank, N.S Road Branch and Rs.20,00,000/- from HDB Bank, Chiria More Branch which would be kept as security in respect of said loan of Rs.1 crore and the remaining Rs.50,00,000/- would be provided to the complainants. Further, complainants were asked to avail two separate life insurance policies from ICICI Prudential from their two separate accounts with the Opposite Parties and the monthly premiums of the polices being Rs.9366/- and Rs.9472/- totalling Rs.18,838/- only. The said policies being No.22326316 and 22595369 were for 20 years. Complainants alleged that though the premium of the policies being deducted from their accounts on a monthly basis but the Opposite Parties did not sanction the said loan as promised. They have not yet received any insurance certificate or policy from neither the Opposite Parties, nor the insurance company. No receipts of premiums were also provided. Subsequently, as the loan of Rs.1 crore was not provided, complainant Nos. 1 & 2 applied for another loan of Rs.12,53,554/- from the Opposite Parties which was duly sanctioned but till date they did not receive any updated statements of the accounts or notice or papers of sanction of loan from the bank. During Covid- 19 lockdown, complainants could not pay the EMI of the said loan and as the Opposite Parties did not offer any moratorium, they faced severe hardships for repaying the loan. On 12/08/2020, the collection agents/goons of the Opposite Parties allegedly visited the shop of the complainants at 23 R.G Kar Road, Kolkata- 700004, started threatening and abusing for not repayment of the said loan in front of their customers. Thereafter, complainants sent a notice on 04/09/2020 to the bank but no answer was given. One legal notice dated 23/11/2020 was also sent to which reply was issued by the bank. Complainants alleged fraudulent acts on the part of the Opposite Parties and they prayed for production of the updated statements for the loan of Rs.12,53,554/- to adjust the remaining amount of the said loan with the total premium of Rs.3,86,126/- paid for the life insurance policies or alternatively to refund the amount of the total premium paid with interest @ 12 % p.a. from June, 2018 to till the date of payment and compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for mental harassment and agony and Rs.1,00,000/- for cost of litigation. Despite service of notice, the Opposite Parties did not appear and contest the case. So, it was heard ex parte against them. Complainants filed their evidence on affidavit and brief notes of argument. From the materials, it is found that subsequently, Opposite Parties appeared in this case and filed an application for setting aside the order of hearing the case ex parte against them which was registered as a Misc. Case. But having heard both sides, the said Misc. Case was dismissed. Now, the point for consideration is whether the complainants are entitled to the relief (s) as prayed for. FINDINGS Complainants are found to have filed one document which is made as Annexure A- 6 and the this is the statement of accounts in the name of M/s. Sri Guru Tea Company i.e. complainant No. 1 for a certain period. This apart, complainant produced Annexure- B which is a complaint of the complainants addressed to the Customer Care Standard Chartered bank. In their written complaint and also evidence, the complainants claimed to have been fraudulently induced by the bank i.e. the Opposite Parties in taking the two insurance polices for getting a loan of Rs.1 crore and ultimately which was not provided to them. That apart, the bank also did not get two existing loans transferred from the HDFC Bank, N.S Road Branch or HDB Bank, Chiria More Branch and the amount of the loans in total was Rs.50,00,000/- which the Opposite Parties wanted to keep the same as security for Rs.1 crore loan. It is further found that complainants again obtained loan of Rs.12,53,554/- from the Opposite Parties and during Covid -19 lockdown, he could not pay the EMIs of that loan. Therefore, the complainants claimed the amount of premiums in respect of two polices opened by them should be adjusted against the said loan or to refund the said amount of premium with interest. What we find in this case that surprisingly, complainants did not produce a single scrap of paper to substantiate his claim that he was fraudulently induced to provide loan by the Opposite Parties or that Opposite Parties had agreed to get their existing loan transferred from two other banks etc. Annexure- A filed by the complainants claiming to show that the premiums of the policies were deducted from their accounts is not at all sufficient to establish that the complainants were deceived by the Opposite Parties. Apart from this, the prayers made by the complainant like adjustment of the loan with the total amount of premium deducted from their accounts or for refund of the amount of premium with interest cannot at all be entertainable in the facts and circumstances of the complainant’s case. However, following their prayer as noted in (b) in the petition of complaint, an updated statement for the loan of Rs.12,53,554 may be directed to the given to the complainants by the Opposite Parties. Accordingly, it is ORDERED That the instant case be and the same is allowed in part ex parte against the Opposite Parties. Both the Opposite Parties are directed to supply the updated statement of the loan account of Rs.12,53,554/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh Fifty Three Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Four Only) to the complainants which is claimed to have been sanctioned by them on the prayer of complainant Nos. 1 & 2. This apart, Opposite Parties to pay Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) towards cost of litigation to the complainants. The said order shall be complied with within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which complainants shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Dictated and corrected by me President |
