Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/17/169

Ravindra Kumar and Parshu Ram Prasad - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Asst. General Manager, State Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

Swaran Singh

05 Feb 2019

ORDER

The complainant Ravindra Kumar and others have filed this case for a claim of Rs 39,665 as subsidy amount and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 5000/-.

2          The case of the complainant is that complainant has took loan from the O.P. Bank for a sum of Rs. 1,96,000/-  namely Ravindra Kumar vide Loan No. 30249349284. As such the complainant is a consumer as defined under section 2(1) (d) of Consumer Protection Act.

            The loan was sanctioned in the year 2007 and initial disbursement was made in January 2008. The Government of India will take over the entire liability of the interest outstanding as on 31.12.2013 for all Education Loans sanctioned up to 31.09.2009 and which are outstanding as on 31.12.2013 and the complainants are entitled for the benefits of the said scheme as they belong to Economically weaker section and in proof thereof they had submitted Income Certificate in June 2011 in compliance to Bank’s requisition dt. 10.05.2011.

            O.P. Bank has not yet provided the above named complainants with the benefits of the said interest Subsidy Scheme in spite of several requests and reminder. For this connection the complainant has lodged a complaint before the Banking Ombudsman on 23.07.2015 and Ombudsman took the serious note of the said complaint and passed necessary directions and in compliance of the mandate of the Banking Ombudsman the O.P. Bank has admitted that erroneously interest subsidy of Rs. 17,329/- for the year 2009 to 10 ad Rs. 22,336/- for the year 2010-11 has not been credited in the said Education Loan account for which the O.P. Bank had purportedly submitted its claim before the A.O. Dhanbad on 02.09.2015 for onward submission to L.H.O. Patna vide their letter No. RASMECC/2015-16/151 dt..03.09.2015 & Letter No. RASMECC/134/2015-16/226 dt. 20.11.2015.

            After getting so many times, O.P. Bank did not credit the interest subsidy in the said Education Loan account till today after issuing legal notice by the complainant and O.P. Bank imposed “hold” upon the Saving Bank account of the complainant No.2 and also issued a demand notice for the amount  of Rs. 26,950/- vide their dt. 06.12.2017.

            From the above circumstances, opposite party is apparently a ma-practice and is tentatively deficiency in banking service and as such the O.P.; is liable for loss and damages suffered by the complainant at the hands of the O.P. and the complainant is entitled for above mentioned claim.

3          Following documents have been filed by the complainant in support :-

Anx-1 Photo copy of application to Ombudsman.

Anx-2 Photo copy of information letter of the Bank.

Anx-3 Photo copy of complaint petition dt. 20.11.2015.

Anx-4 Photo copy of legal notice dt. 27.01.2016.

Anx-5 Photo  copy of reply of the O.P.  dt. 05.02.2016.

Anx-6 Photo copy of letter of the O.P. Bank dt. 06.12.2017.

4          After issuance of notice, O.P. Bank  appeared and filed W.S. I(t is submitted that O.P. has also sent a letter dt. 10.11.2010 for providing Annual family Income Certificate before the Bank but till date complainant has not provided the same, thereafter, O.P. Bank also tried to contract the complainant over the Mobil/Telephone but O.P. could not contact the complainant. It is further submitted that O.P. has sent several reminder to the complainant for providing the necessary certificate but till today he neither contacted to Bank nor filed any document in connection with credited the aforesaid subsidy amount.

5          Following document has been deposited in support of case:-

Anx-A Photo copy of terms and conditions of Subsidy scheme.

Anx-B Photo copy of undertaking certificate.

Anx-C Photo copy of Postal receipt.

Anx-D Photo copy of reminder letter dt. 24.02.2011.

Anx-E Photo Copy of reminder letter dt. 09.05.2011.

Anx-F Photo copy of reminder letter dt. 10.05.2011.

Anx—G & G1 Photo copies of circular letter dt. 14.03.2014.

Anx-H to H3 Photo copies of letter dt. 03.09.2015.

                                                           

F I N D I N G S

6          We perused the record and documents filed from both the sides.

            It is admitted by the O.P. regarding loan education sanctioned to the complainant. It is admitted as per his scheme of the Govt. of India, the interest subsidy for the economical weaker section person provided. The plea has been taken by the O.P. that they have consulted D.G.M. S.B.I. Administration office, Dhanbad for pending of payment of interest subsidy of the complainant Ravindra Kumar and requested to take up the matter with LHO Patna. It is also submitted that as per the E-circular PUB-Personal Loan Sl. NO. 689/2015-16, circular No. NBG/PBU/PL-Education/31/2015-16 dt. 31.08.2015 that the Canara Bank is Nodal Bank of Central Government for payment of interest subsidy. The O.P. agreed to credit the interest subsidy of the education loan of the complainant as soon as receipt from the competent authority.

7          The complainant has complained that the O.P. Bank S.B.I. Dhanbad RASMECC cum SARC, City Centre, Sector-4 , Bokaro has “imposed” hold upon S.B. account of the complainant No.2 Parshu Ram Prasad F/o complainant Ravindar Kumar who had taken the loan and also issued a Demand Note for recovery of Rs. 26,950/-.

            From the above fact and circumstances the interest subsidy is not being credited in the loan account of the complainant Ravindar Kumar then in that circumstances the O.P. S.B.I. shall not be entitled to “Hold” on the S.B. account of the father Parshu Ram Prasad and issued a Demand Note of Rs. 26,950/- is also against natural justice and therefore, we found that this is negligence on the part of the S.B.I. RASMECC cum SARC, City Centre, Sector-4 , Bokaro for putting “Hold” on the S.B. account and issuing Demand Note for recovery and  is deficiency in service.

8          Thus, we direct the State Bank of India (S.B.I.) RASMECC cum SARC, City Centre, Sector-4 , Bokaro  to “unhold” S.B. account of Parshu Ram Prasad guarantor cum father of complainant Ravindar Kumar who had taken education loan and also directed to cancel the Demand Note notice issued because there is no fault on the part of the complainant and his father.

9          The above order must be complied immediately within 30 days from passing of this order and also directed to credit the subsidy interest in the education loan account of the complainant Ravindar Kumar as soon as possible.