Fact of the Case in Brief:- The complainant filed his complaint petition against the OPs stated that the complainant Narottam Soni is a farmer he took loan from SBI ADB Branch, Nuapada. The loan is for the purpose of Agriculture to purchase a tractor and financed Rs.4,97,000 dated 03.11.08 from the SBI ADB Branch, Nuapada. The OP No.2 had sanctioned an Agricultural Term loan Rs.4,97,000(Four Lakhs Ninty Seven Thousand)only @ 11.75% per annum on dated 03.11.08 vide Account No.ATL 30551882683 for purchase of Tractor and trolley . The Tractor was Registered before RTO , Nuapada vide Regd No.OR-26-7365 tractor and Trolley No.OR-26-7366. The financed Tractor got accident on 27.02.2011 at an unmanned level crossing between Lakhna and Nuapada Railway line a passenger Train was dashed with the Tractor and due to accident the tractor was totally damaged and broken into pieces. The Railway police Kantabanji Registered a case before SDJM, Nuapada vide case No.2(c)(cc)7/2011 and case is disposed on 09.11.2011.
The case is disposed off on dated 09.11.2011 accordingly where the accused flied away from the spot No evidence and document prove the cause of accident etc. as mentioned in the copy of judgment SDJM,Nuapada.
The complainant has never filed any Insurance document relating to claim even not mentioned in his petition about insurance policy enforce during the time of accident. The complainant has mentioned in his petition, he immediately approached the O.Ps about the accident and Insurance claims. The O.P. No. 1 & 2 has collect the insurance premium but not settle the claim of the complainant where the complainant is outstanding due is Rs. 5,54,437/- towards loan.
The O.P. No.1 has not the necessary party and stated that, O.P. No.1 is not responsible for the deficiency in service. O.P. No. 2 Branch Manager, State Bank of India ADB Branch has sued the case on behalf of Branch not the O.P. No. 1, hence case is not maintainable against him. O.P. No. 2 has sanctioned the loan for purchase of tractor accordingly O.P. No. 2 has given loan to the complainant Narottam Soni for agricultural purpose. The original Registration Certificate returned in the hand of the complainant. The complainant never informed about the accident and any claim rather he created a case to avoid payment of outstanding dues. The O.P. No. 3 has never filed any version in this case as because the Insurance Premium is collected the concerned Branch.
The Hon’ble Forum has come to the conclusion that, it is found from the record and document the tractor was kept in the train line before the accident so it is purely intentional.
2) Whether the complainant has insured the Tractor at the time of accident or not ?
3) The petitioner/complainant has never given any endorsement in the case that, he has filed in any other Court/ Forum for compensation i.e. Railway Tribunal or MACT etc.
4) In this case nobody has given any evidence or affidavit to prove this case and cause of accident except the petitioner but the complainant was not an accused in the GR Case of SDJM, Nuapada, if he was examined and not filed any document relating to prove this case even not filed any evidence of witnesses who has examined in the court. Hence, the Hon’ble Forum has come to a conclusion that the accident is a created accident to avoid for recovery of loan of O.P.
O R D E R.
Perused the records and relevant documents filed by the complainant. The case has no merit due to above reason. Hence, this case is dismissed.
Judgment pronounced in the Open Court of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nuapada, this the 25th day of August 2015.
