Haryana

Sonipat

CC/131/2015

1. Rajender - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch manager Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

K.C. Dalal

15 Mar 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

 

                Complaint No.131 of 2015

Instituted on: 17.04.2015                                                     

Date of order:16.03.2016 

 

1.Rajender 2. Hawa Singh sons of Chandu alias Chander Singh 3. Chandu alias Chander Singh son of Sh. Jai Ram, all residents of village Gumar, tehsil Ganaur, Distt. Sonepat.

 

…Complainants.         Versus

The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Ganaur road, Ganaur, distt. Sonepat.

 

                                       …Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Sh. KC Dalal Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Manoj Kumar, Advocate for respondent.

 

Before-    Nagender Singh-President.

          Prabha Wati-Member.

           D.V. Rathi-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

        Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging themselves to be the owners in possession of the land measuring 21 kanals 19 Marlas as fully detailed in para no.1 of the complaint.  They have mortgaged the said property with the respondent for sanctioning of the loan amount.  The respondent has opened the account of the complainants in the bank, but till today they have not sanctioned the loan amount to the complainant.  The complainants have requested the respondent several times in this regard and has also served the respondent with legal notice dated 7.11.2014 but the same has also not brought any fruitful result. So, they have come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.       In reply, the respondent has submitted that several loan formalities to be completed by the complainants are pending. The respondent has performed his duties in good faith and in bonafide and reasoned manner. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.       We have heard both the learned counsel for the parties at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

4.       In the present case, the complainants have submitted that they have mortgaged the land as fully detailed in para no.1 of the complaint for sanctioning of the loan amount.  The respondent has opened the account of the complainants in the bank, but till today they have not sanctioned the loan amount to the complainant and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

         On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that several loan formalities to be completed by the complainants are pending. The respondent has performed his duties in good faith and in bonafide and reasoned manner. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

         The perusal of the document Annexure C7 shows that this document was prepared on 19.6.2013, whereas the complainants have applied for the grant of loan on 7.4.2014.  Further more, as per document Annexure C3, the land of the complainant had already been mortgaged with the respondent vide rapat no.487 dated 29.4.2014 vide register no.108 dated 7.4.2014    against amounting to Rs.3,75,000/-.  In our view, there is no need to direct the complainants

for mortgaging the land again particularly when the same has already been mortgaged in favour of the respondent bank.  However, in our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if some directions are given to both the parties.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the complainants to deposit the required documents with the respondent and also to complete the formalities of the respondent bank within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order.  Similarly, the respondent bank is hereby directed that in case the complainants are interested in taking the loan and if the complainants deposit the required documents and complete the formalities, the respondent bank shall disburse the loan amount in favour of the complainant as per terms and conditions of the loan within a period of one month, which shall start from the day when the complainants do the needful as directed above.

         With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands disposed off.

         Certified copy of this order he provided to both the parties free of cost.

         File be consigned after due compliance.

 

 

(Prabha Wati) (DV Rathi)            (Nagender Singh)           

Member,DCDRF, Member, DCDRF           President, DCDRF

Sonepat.      Sonepat.                Sonepat.

 

Announced 16.03.2016