JUDGMENT

            Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.12 of C.P. Act, 1986 seeking the following reliefs:

            “Direct the opposite parties to pay sum of Rs.9,50,000/- towards negligence of service, financial loss, harassment and mental agony”.

            The brief facts of the case of the complainant is that, the complainant to maintain her family and livelyhood applied a loan to opposite party No.2 for establishment of a Poultry Farm in her land and wants to get subsidy from the APICOL ‘O’ Bhubaneswar through the opposite party No.2. After visiting the spot opposite parties No.2 & 3 gave their report to opposite party No.1 and accordingly opposite party No.1 sanction the loan amount Rs.5,97,730/- with the rate of interest 13.50% per annum for the grace period of six months in favour of the complainant on 28.7.2009 and also directed the complainant to open a S/B account in the said bank. Thereafter the complainant opened her bank A/c No.7364 on 22.6.2009 and the said account number subsequently change as computerized A/c No.41180100003009. The opposite party No.1 sanctioned the loan in favour of the complainant on the following dates after receiving the feasibility report from opposite party No.3.

Dated                                              Amount     

28.7.2009                                        Rs.1,00,000/-

26.4.2010                                        Rs.1,00,000/-

07.8.2010                                        Rs.1,15,000/-

25.02.2011                                      Rs.0,70,000/-

28.4.2012                                        Rs.2,12,385/- 

                                           Total Rs.5,97,385/-

            The opposite party No.1 took near about three years to disburse the loan amount in favour of the complainant for that the complainant could not able to construct her farm due to negligence of the opposite parties and also unable to start her business.  The opposite party No.1 forcibly and surprisingly deducted the sum of Rs.1,02,000/- on 01.5.2012 without assigning any reason from the complainant for which the complainant sustained mental agony and harassment. On 13.02.2014 the opposite party No.1 issued a notice in favour of the complainant to pay the loan amount of Rs.7,68,533/- within 31.01.2014. The complainant went to the office of the opposite party enquired the matter, but the bank was reluctant to gave the answer of the said notice. Rather threatened the complainant to repay the said amount immediately, otherwise the legal action would be taken against her.  

            Opposite parties No.3 & 4 have been set ex-parte. Opposite parties No.1 & 2 have filed their written version. Opposite party No.2 has stated as under;

            As per norms, the complainant has to complete the project within two years from the date of sponsor of the proposal. It is a matter of regret that, the complainant did not return to this office for a long period of three years. Neither the financing institution nor the complainant informed this office about sanction, disbursement and completion of the project. On 08.01.2013 the complainant submitted the project completion report and evaluation report to the undersigned though the go ahead letter was issued on 21.4.2010. The undersigned immediately instructed to the Asst. Agriculture Engineer, Tirtol to visit and verify the said project and to furnish the evaluation report to this office. Unfortunately the Asst. Agriculture Engineer, Tirtol reported that, the said project has not been completed by the complainant as per the specification of the project besides, the complainant has not submitted any vouchers in respect of the project to this office for release of subsidy.

           The grievance of the complainant is mostly against opposite party No.1, who has filed his version stating as under;

            The impugned loan being a Term Loan in nature is supposed to be released in phases/installments. Since the loan was to be released in phased manner, as a natural corollary, every installment so released has to stand the scrutiny of the test of being utilized properly. In other words, only after ensuring that the installment released has been properly utilized, the bank is supposed to release the next subsequent installment of the loan amount. At no point of time the allegation of delay in releasing the loan has been agitated by the complainant but it was only after the issuance of notice advising her for repayment of the loan amount, with oblique motive, such allegation has been surfaced by the complainant for the first time in the complaint petition. The other allegation that the complainant raises is that on 01.5.2012 an amount of Rs.1,02,000/- has been forcibly deducted by the opposite party Bank. As regards to this, as herein above the said amount has been paid by the complainant herself voluntarily and out of her own accord and the relevant pay in slip voucher has also been executed by her for the purpose. Hence in view of this the allegation is not only suffers from want of truth but also establishes that the complainant has not come up with clean hands. The complainant’s loan application was sponsored under Govt. sponsored scheme for finance of loan amount of Rs.5,97,730/- for setting up a poultry firm. In response to which the opposite party bank after due consideration of the said request and after execution of the relevant loan documents by the complainant herself, extended the said loan. After availing the loan complainant failed to make the repayment as agreed upon by him.

            The complainant has received the loan on 28.7.2009, 26.4.2010, 07.8.2010, 25.02.2011 & 28.4.2012 amounting Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.1,00,000/-, Rs.1,15,000/-, Rs.70,000/- & Rs.2,12,385/- respectively amounting total Rs.5,12,385/- with interest @ 13.5 per annum. The loan was to be repaid within five years after completion of the projects. The grievance of the complainant arose on 13.02.2014 when the opposite party No.1 issued demand notice to pay Rs.7,68,533/- and her further grievance is regarding deduction of Rs.1,02,000/- on 01.5.2012 and thus complainant has file this consumer complaint claiming Rs.9,50,000/-.

            The complainant has taken loan during 2009 to 2012 but has not filed a single paper showing details of payment and there is also no averment to the effect as to how much complainant has repaid the bank.

            The bank is not disbursing the loan as charity but sanctioning the loan with agreement to be repaid with 13.5% interest and within a period of five years.

            The loan was paid during 28.7.2009 to 28.4.2012. If we take the middle period then it comes to 13.12.2010 as such the complainant should have cleared the loan as on 13.12.2015. The complainant has not raised anything regarding demand of Rs.7,68,533/- as on 31.01.2014 which goes to show that the complainant has not paid the loan amount/installment regularly for which there is such huge demand from the opposite party bank, the complainant has availed as subsidy but failed to pay the loan in time. Demand notice by the opposite party No.1 is the natural process which cannot be termed as deficiency in service. As such we held that complainant has failed to make out a case regarding deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties specifically against opposite party No.1, as such the consumer complaint is dismissed without any cost.