Ld. Advocate(s)
For Complainant: Ichha Haque Biswas
For OP/OPs : Saptarshi Biswas
Date of filing of the case :11.01.2018
Date of Disposal of the case :31.07.2024
Final Order / Judgment dtd.31.07.2024
The basic fact of the case of the complainant is that the complainant Dr. Saidur Rahaman Munshi took a loan in 2006 from the OP Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank for Rs.1,00,000/- on 17.12.2006 being loan account no. RTL/159/06 which he repaid time to time. The complainant again took a loan in 2008 from the OP for Rs.2,50,000/- on 01.10.2008 being account no. RTL/190/08 at pass book no.5303300000165. The complainant repaid the loan in instalment but suddenly his wife died on 26.09.2012 due to cancer for which he failed to repay all the instalment. The OP served a notice on 27.01.2016 for a special loan recovery camp and demanded Rs.69728/- against the said loan. The complainant repaid the entire dues of Rs.69728/- in 4 instalments and the OP issued money receipt. The date of instalment payment is 27.01.2016 Rs.3,000/-, 18.02.2016 Rs.40,000/-, 16.03.2016 Rs.10,000/-, 16.05.2016 Rs.16,708/- total Rs.69728/-. After repayment of the loan the OP did not give any loan clearance certificate and the LICI Certificate which were deposited as security of loan being certificate policy no.423386136, 423386135, 424017554, 422190301, 424017553 and 423323998. The complainant requested to the OP several times to issue loan clearance certificate and handover the LICI Certificate and also sent registered letter on 27.05.2016 but the OP did not return it despite receiving the notice. The complainant , therefore, sent a legal notice to OP on 04.05.2017 but the OP did not reply . The OP has withdrawn Rs.75017/- from the said LICI Certificate on 30.06.2017 which matured on 28.05.2017 without informing the complainant. Due to such activities of the OP the complainant suffered loss mental pain and agony. So, the present case is filed. The cause of action arose on 30.06.2017 and on subsequent dates. The complainant prayed for an award for Rs. 75017/- together with interest with a direction to OP to issue loan clearance certificate and return of LICI Certificate , Rs.30,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 20,000/- towards litigation cost.
The OP contested the case by filing W/V wherein they denied the allegation. The OP challenged the case as not maintainable and barred by law. The positive defence case of the OP is that that the OP Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank , Khidirpur granted a term loan to the complainant for Rs.2,50,000/- on 24.09.2008 with a repayment schedule of 58 monthly instalments in Rs.5600/- commencing from December, 2008 bearing loan account no. 5303300000165. The complainant failed to repay the loan in due time and the account became NPA. So, the OP issued demand notice on 27.01.2016 for repayment of the said loan by paying Rs.69728/- under special recovery drive within 19.02.2016. In the said notice it was stated that if the complainant fails to repay then the OP will adjust the securities taken at the time of sanctioning the loan that is LICI Certificate . The complainant paid Rs.3,000/- on 27.01.2016, Rs.40,000/- on 18.02.2016 but did not pay Rs.69728/- within 19.02.2016, so the OP realised Rs.49093/- by adjustment and the balance amount was credited to the account of the complainant.
The complainant was disqualified from the ambit of special relaxation since he failed to repay the loan within due time. The OP, therefore, claimed that the case is liable to be dismissed with cost.
The conflicting pleadings of the parties demand for adjudication of the following points.
Points for Determination
Point No.1.
Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and prayer.
Point No.2.
Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
Point No.3.
To what other relief if any the complainant is entitled to get.
Decision with Reasons
Point No.1.
The OP challenged the case as not maintainable but in course of argument Ld. Defence Counsel did not advance any argument on that point. However, having perused the pleadings of the parties and the evidence in the case record the Commission finds that both the parties reside within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. The amount of money involved in the dispute and the relief claimed are well within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Commission. After considering the legal aspect it is held that there is no legal impediment to hold that the case is maintainable or that it is not barred under any provisions of law.
Accordingly, point no.1 is answered in affirmative on behalf of the complainant.
Point No.2&3.
Both the two points have very close nexus with each other and as such these are taken up together for brevity and convenience of discussion.
The complainant in order to substantiate the case proved the following documents.
Annexure-1:- Loan sanction document.
Annexure-2(1):- Copy of pass book.
Annexure-3(1):- LIC premium receipt.
Annexure-3(2) :- LIC premium receipt.
Annexure-3(3) :- LIC premium receipt.
Annexure-3(4):- LIC premium receipt.
Annexure-3(5):- LIC premium receipt.
Annexure-3(6):- LIC status report.
Annexure-4:- Special loan recovery camp notice.
Anneuxre-5(1):- Cash deposit receipt.
Anneuxre-5(2):- Cash deposit receipt.
Annexure-5(3):- Cash deposit receipt for Rs.10,000/-.
Anexure-5(4):- Cash deposit receipt.
Annexure-6(1):- Letter by the complainant to the OP dated 27.05.2016.
Annexure-6(2):- Postal receipt .
Annexure-6(3):- Postal Track Report.
Annexure-7:- Legal notice to the OP.
Annexure-7(2):- Copy of A/D Card.
It is the admitted fact that the OP granted the loan to the complainant for Rs.2,50,000/- on 24.09.2008 which is payable in instalment. From the document, it is found that the complainant repaid the loan in part: Rs.3,000/- on 27.01.2016, Rs.40,000/- on 28.02.2016. As per the case of the complainant he could not repay the entire loan amount due to decease of his wife.
The case record further discloses that the OP bank issued a notice for realisation of the loan money through a special loan recovery camp dated 27.01.2016 issued by the OP Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank .
As per the said notice it was directed for repayment of the loan.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant drew attention of the Commission regarding the said notice. In the said special loan recovery camp notice it was written for repayment either in full or according to the capacity of the loanee. So, the OP could not forfeit the LIC Certificate of the OP in recovery of the loan.
Ld. Defence Counsel argued that since the complainant did not deposit the loan money in the recovery camp, so the bank deducted it.
It is fact that in the said notice it is stated that the loanee may repay either in full or according to his capacity. But Ld. Defence Counsel argued that it was written in the said notice if the loan is not repaid on that date all the security will be adjusted against the loan account.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant argued that the last part in the notice has been written in hand writing without any initial . So, it was written subsequently.
It is fact that the said portion is written in hand writing without any initial but the complainant after getting the notice did not challenge it.
A close scrutiny of the said document further discloses that the complainant has filed the said document. It means that it was in the custody of the complainant. So, it cannot be held that it was written after the special loan recovery camp was over. So, the complainant could have challenged the said document before the date of the loan recovery camp.
In the said notice it is further written that if the loanee fails to repay the loan it would be considered that the loanee has not repaid the loan whimsically and the bank has right to recovery it.
It is not the case of the complainant that the OP bank has deducted money in excess of the actual due. The said LIC certificates were kept by the OP bank as securities which were taken at the time of sanctioning the loan.
Ld. Defence Counsel argued that in the said notice it is also written in hand writing that if the loan is not repaid it would be adjusted through the security.
The complainant appears to have not raised any question in cross examination that the said hand written portion is not supported by any initial or a seal of the issuing authority and asked that whether it is true or not. The complainant in answer to questionnaires by OP in question no.4 answered that if the loan is not repaid all the securities would be adjusted against the said loan. It means that the OP has explained that it was written in the said notice about the means of recovery of the loan.
Be that as it may , after assessing the entire evidence it transpires the complainant could not prove any document to show that he paid the loan money within the due time. So, the bank authority OP recovered the loan money from the securities deposited to them.
However, the claim of the complainant is reasonable and proper and as such OP should issue a loan clearance certificate to the complainant and the other LIC Certificates to the OP. That being not done by the OP it has caused harassment to the complainant which should be compensated in terms of money.
In the backdrop of the aforesaid assessment of evidence vis-a-vis discussion and observation made hereinabove the Commission comes to the finding that the OP has caused delay in rendering service to the complainant. The complainant is therefore, entitled to get compensation .
Accordingly, point no.2&3 are decided in favour of the complainant in part.
Consequently, the complaint case succeeds on contest against the OP in part.
Hence,
It is
Ordered
that the complaint case no.CC/05/2018 be and the same is allowed on contest against OP in part .The complainant Dr. Saidur Rahaman Munshi do get an award against the OP with a direction to the OP to issue Loan Clearance Certificate to the complainant and return back the LICI Certificate as stated in the complaint within 30 days from passing the order, Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand) towards harassment and mental pain and agony and Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) towards litigation cost. OP is directed to comply with the order and pay Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) within 30 days from the date of passing the final order failing which the entire award money shall carry an interest @ 8% p.a from the date of passing the final order till the date of its realisation.
All Interim Applications (I.A) stand disposed of accordingly.
D.A to note in the trial register.
The case is accordingly disposed of.
Let a copy of this final order be supplied to both the parties at free of costs.
Dictated & corrected by me
............................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,) ................ ..........................................
PRESIDENT
(Shri HARADHAN MUKHOPADHYAY,)
I concur,
........................................
MEMBER
(SHRI NIROD BARAN ROY CHOWDHURY)
