Hon’ble Mrs. Rumki Samajdar, Member
This is a case U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the Complainant against the O.P.
The brief fact of the case is that the Complainant applied before the O.P. Bank for financial assistance under PMEGP for business of servicing of electric, electronic appliances and equipments. After making satisfactory enquiry, the O.P. Bank sanctioned the alleged loan of Rs. 2,00000/- in favour of the Complainant.
The further case of the Complainant is that as per the direction of the O.P. the Complainant has completed the rural self employment training.
After completion of all the satisfactory enquiry & procedure, the O.P. Bank sanctioned the loan and on 29.06.19 sent Rs.10, 000/- to the A/C of the Complainant. At the same time, the O.P. also started one loan recovery A/C No.19150600001414, lastly, on 29.11.16, the O.P. received all the loan amount with interest through the aforesaid recovery A/C.
The further case of the Complainant is that on 06.11.17 the Complainant filed a written application before the O.P. Bank for releasing the rest amount sanctioned loan including the Govt. subsidy but the Bank did not disburse the same. The further case of the Complainant is that the Complainant purchased some electrical goods on 21.01.18 and the bill invoice or the quotation Amount of Rs. 87,699.50/- dated 21.01.18 was submitted to the O.P. Bank but the quotation amount is still not paid to the Complainant or to the dealer from whom the electric materials ware purchased.
The further case of the Complainant is that the O.P. bank also freezed the security money of Rs.22,222/- which has been deposited as security deposit as per the direction of the O.P.
It is claimed that the Complainant had also filed a complaint before the Consumer Affairs vide No.1367/92/CCICC/18-19 on 20.09.18 but the matter was not settled.
Hence, the Complainant finding no other alternative, filed the instant case with a request to direct the O.P. to disburse the rest amount of loan, release the Complainant’s security money, the subsidy amount, disburse the quotation amount of Rs.87,699.50/-, payment of Rs.1,00000/- as deficiency in service, and Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost interalia.
The O.P. did not turn up before this Forum and as such, the case proceeded ex-parte against him (vide Order No.04 dated 21.02.19).
In Order to prove the case, the complainant has filed evidence on affidavit alongwith the Firisti of original documents and written argument.
We have heard the argument of the Complainant and perused the materials on record.
Considering the above averments the following issues necessarily come out for consideration in this case.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the complainant a consumer U/S 2 (1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant case?
- Has the O.P. any deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief/reliefs as they prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point No.1
It appears from the record and the documents filed by the Complainant that he is a Consumer of the Bank of Baroda, Bhulki Branch, Cooch Behar having his A/C vide No.19150100006153 to get the service from the O.P. with a promise to pay or to tender the rest loan amount.
As per the provision laid down U/S 2(1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer protection Act, 1986 the status of the Complainant hear in this case is found to be a consumer.
Point No.2.
The Complainant is a resident of Vill & P.O. Bhulki, P.S. Sahebganj, Dist- Cooch Behar, Pin-736134 and the O.P. i.e. Bank of Baroda, Bhulki Branch is also situated at the same place. The Complainant and the O.P. both fall within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claim amount of the Complainant does not exceed the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum. As such, the instant case is maintainable.
Point No.3 & 4.
These two points are taken up together for consideration for brevity and their inter- relatedness.
Upon hearing the Complainant and on perusal of the materials on record, we find that the Complainant applied to the O.P. Bank for financial assistance under PMEGP for business of servicing of electric, electronic appliances and equipments. The O.P. Bank sanctioned a loan of Rs.2,00000/- on 21.03.2016 with a detailed breakup of the aforesaid loan (Annexure-A). On 29.06.2016, the O.P. Bank disbursed Rs.10,000/- to the A/C of the Complainant and also started a loan recovery A/C vide No.1915060001414 through which the O.P received all the loan amount alongwith interest ( Annexure-C series). Thereafter, on 06.11.2017 the Complainant filed a written petition before the O.P. requesting for releasing the rest sanctioned loan amount including the amount of Govt. subsidy (Annexure-D). But the O.P. did not pay any heed to the petition of the Complainant and did not disburse the rest loan amount.
As per the terms and conditions of the loan sanctioned, the Complainant obtained the quotation of Rs.87,699.50/- dated 21.01.2018 and approached before the O.P. Bank (Annexure- E). Lastly, on 29/09/2018 the Complainant filed a complaint before the Consumer Affairs and O.P. also appeared before the Consumer Affairs welfare Officer and submitted a written statement (Annexure- G). In that written statement, the O.P. Bank admitted that a loan of Rs. 2,00000/- under PMEGP scheme was sanctioned to the Complainant. The Complainant also filed a request Letter for further disbursement of the rest loan amount for smooth running of his business. It is also admitted by the O.P. Bank about the quotation of Rs.87,699.50/- which was obtained by the Complainant and placed before the O.P. The Complainant also deposited Rs.22,222/- as security deposit as per the direction of the O.P. Bank which is said to be still frozen.
From the documents filed by the Complainant, we find that the Complainant on several occasions had filed letters to the O.P. Bank for the disbursement of the rest amount of the loan and Govt. subsidy. But the O.P. did not pay any heed. The amount which was transferred to the Complainant’s A/C, at that same time, a loan recovery A/C was also opened and the O.P. received the total loan amount alongwith interest. The Complainant, following the terms and conditions laid down for obtaining the aforesaid loan, did not get the full disbursement of the loan amount.
So, inspite of disbursing the rest loan amount to the Complainant following the terms and conditions of the loan sanctioned, the O.P. Bank willfully harassed the Complainant. It is the duty of the Bank to render proper service to his consumer following the terms and conditions of the aforesaid scheme. In this way, the O.P. Bank willfully harassed the Complainant and caused mental pain and agony. In the light of the aforesaid discussion we find that there is not only deficiency in service but also unfair trade practice on the part of the O.P. Thus, the Complainant is entitled to get the relief(s) in this case.
Thus, all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, for ends of justice; it is -
ORDERED
That the instant complaint U/S 12 of C.P. Act, 1986 is allowed ex-parte against the O.P.
The O.P. Bank is directed to take necessary steps so that the Complainant gets total full benefit of the loan sanction by them on the term and condition as agreed by the parties.
The O.P. is also directed to give the benefit of the subsidy amount in accordance with the Govt., rules and regulation related to that.
The O.P. also to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for causing harassment and mental agony and further Rs. 5,000/- as cost.
The O.P. to comply with the Order within a month from the date of this Order failing which the Complainant is at liberty to execute the same through due process of law.
Let a copy of this final order be sent to the concerned parties through registered post with A/D or hand over forthwith for information and necessary action. A copy of this Final Order/Judgment also available at www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated & Corrected by me -
