By :  SMT. BANDANA ROY, PRESIDENT         

The case of the complainant in brief is that he is a retired primary school teacher.  He took a house building loan of Rs. 1,66,000/- from the OP Bank against his service being A/C No. NA 896. He started repayment of the EMI from the next month and all the dues including interest had been cleared in the year 2010 and the OP issued a certificate of no objection on 05.02.10. Suddenly on 30.10.13 the bank issued a letter to the complainant stating that a sum of Rs. 66,549/-is lying due. The OP repeatedly insisted to repay  that amount although  all the dues have been paid by the complainant. Being a retired person to save himself the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on 09.12.15 and again the same amount on 22.02.16, totaling Rs. 40,000/-as the OP sent a letter to the SI of School, Nandigram  to stop  sanction of pension to the retired complainant. The complainant is suffering from agony for the deficiency of servicew of the OP Bank and as such he made a complaint before the Assistant Director of Consumer Affairs, Purba Medinipur on 03.10.16. The OP appeared on 17.11.16 but did not comply the order of the Ld AD, Consumer Affairs, Purba Medinipur

Under such circumstances under tremendous mental pressure the complainant has filed this complaint praying for the reliefs as mentioned therein on the ground of gross negligence and/or deficiency on the part of the OPs.

The OP has contested the case by filing written version and denied all the material allegations made against it and prays for dismissal of the complaint. The specific case of these OP is  that  the complainant on 09.12.15 the complainant  made a prayer before the OP Bank for exempting him from payment of interest of loan and desired to pay Rs. 20,000/-  and that prayer is still pending. It is further case of the OP that from his statement of account he paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on 26.02.16 and as on that date a sum of Rs. 46,549/- was due from him. It also reveals from his statement of loan Account that petitioner paid Rs. 40,000/- as OTS on 31.03.16 and his balance was Rs. 6,549/- and said balance is treated as revenue loss on 07.06.16. the complainant paid his loan amount which was due to the bank and there is no question of being afraid or that the Bank served any intimation upon the SI of School, Nandigram for stop payment of pension in favour of the complainant. It is the case of the OPs that the complainant has intentionally filed this case to harass the OPs which deserves to be dismissed with cost.

On the basis of the above pleadings the points to be considered are 1) whether the complaint is maintainable and 2) whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?

                                                                               Decision with Reasons.         

Both the points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience and brevity.

We have perused the complaint, the written version and the written arguments submitted by both the parties in this case.

The complainant has agitated before this Forum that though he paid all the dues taken from the bank as loan  and the OP bank has given a no objection certificate to the complainant, even then  the OP Bank gave a direction upon the SI of Schools Nandigram (S) Circle  for stay payment of pension  amount to the complainant on the plea that a sum of Rs. 66,549/- is lying due from the complainant.

The OP in its written version and also in the written argument admitted that the complainant paid Rs. 20,000/- on 09.12.15 and said amount has been received by the OP. OP also  admitted that the complainant paid Rs. 20,000/- on 26.02.16 and remaining balance was Rs. 46,549/- due from the complainant . In para 10 of the written version the OP has further admitted that the complainant paid Rs. 40,000/-  as OTS and on 31.03.16 the balance of the complainant was Rs. 6549/-which  was treated as revenue loss on 07.0616 by the OP. it appears from Annexure IV submitted by the complainant that OP   gave a certificate to the complainant that loan is closed through compromise. So, the Op cannot claim again any amount from the complainant. We are of the view that the OP has no right to give any direction on the SI of School Nandigram (S) Circle for not make payment of pension to the complainant. This is a gross deficiency on the part of the OP. Hence, we are of the view that the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for in the petition of complaint.

Hence,

                                                                                O R D E R E D

That the complainant case No. 339/16 be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite Party .

The OP is directed to pay compensation of  Rs. 20,000/-  and litigation cost of Rs. 5000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order  failing which the OP will  have to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per day as punitive charge which will be payable  to the Consumer Welfare Fund of this Forum.

Let copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of costs.