West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/22/2014

Sadhan Chandra Dhara. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, State Bank Of India. - Opp.Party(s)

30 Jul 2014

ORDER

                                                           DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

 Complaint case No.22/2014                                                                                         

 BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr.Sujit Kumar Das.

                                                      MEMBER :  xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

                                                      MEMBER :  Mr. Kapot Chattopadhyay.

    For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff : Mr. A. K. Dutta. Advocate.

    For the Defendant/O.P.S.                           : xxxxxxxxxxx

          

Sadhan Chandra Dhara, S/o- Late Shyamcharan Dhara of vill. Naduya P.O.-Kalakari, P.S.-Chandrakona, Dist-Paschim Medinipur… …………Complainant.

                                                              Vs.

1)  The Branch Manager, State Bank Of India, Ghatal Branch, P.O.& P.S.- Ghatal,  Dist-  

     Paschim Medinipur, Pin-721212 .

2)Regional Manager, Agriculture Insurance Company India Ltd. At OM Tower, 5th Floor, 32 Chowringhee Road ( Near Park Street Metro Station ), Kolkata-700071………………..Ops.

Mr Kapot Kumar Chattopadhyay (Member.)

                                                                                                  Dated:   30/07/2014        

               Complainant is present. Today is date fixed for ex-party hearing. Hd. Ld. Advocate and perused the documents. It appears from the record that the Ops. are avoiding their appearance despite having received the notice in due time. Thus there exists strong reasons to believe that the Ops. are willfully avoiding their appearance in the case Ld. Advocate for the Complainant filed relevant documents on the point of service of notice. In view of the present circumstances and the material on record, there is no option but to here the case ex-party. Accordingly, the case is  heard and considered.

Facts of the case

1)That the Complainant is permanent resident of vill. Naduya P.S. Chandrakona Dist. Paschim Medinipur, within the jurisdiction of Hono’ble Forum and Opp. Party no.1 State Bank Of India and his branch office situated at Ghatal P.S. Ghatal with the jurisdiction of Hono’ble Forum.

 

                                                Contd……………P/2

 

–( 2 ) –    

 

2)That the Complainant is small cultivator and owner of about 1 ac of cultivated land in their area Opp. Party no.1 is the area Bank in their area and Complainant opened Kishan Credit card account no.31529042032 for cultivation loan Rs. 35,000/- on 04/12/2012 from said account and Opp. Party no.1 Bank authority received potato Insurance premium as Rs. 1,721.75/- on 17/01/2013 for the year 2012-2013. 

3)That due to virus infection in the area mouza major portion of cultivated potato has been badly damaged to the great extaint and all cultivation of potato including Complainant informed the said situation to the concern Bank, Panchayat authority and Block Development Office Chandrakona.

4)That due to information  Panchayat authority B.D.O. as well as agriculture Dept. of Govt. of West Bengal physically verified actual damage of potato and Opp. Party no.2 received the said report within time.

5)That the Complainant and other cultivators of their area received potato loan from Opp. Party no.1 Bank for the period of 2012-2013 and Opp. Party no.1 received premium of insurance for potato cultivation from Complainant and proper authority submitted the damaged report and Opp. Party no.1 received insurance benefit from Opp. Party no.2 in Insurance Company within by co lateral contract.

6)That the Complainant is a proper cultivator and Complainant is a consumer of Opp. Party and Opp. Party no.1 received 66% insurance benefit as per report from Opp. Party no.2 Insurance company and  quantum of amount still now Opp. Party no.1 did not adjust in the loan account of the Complainant and complaint is a Kishan Credit Card holder and Opp. Party opp.1 issued the same as a cultivator.

7)That the Complainant send written representation to the Opp. Party no.1 and Opp. Party no.1 received the same within time and still now Opp. Party no.1 with held Insurance benefit of Complainant.

The S.B.I. failed gives satisfactory answer rather harassed to Complainant.

The Complainant alleges that such dilatory practice is illegal and improper and there is gross deficiency of service from the side of S.B.I.

       We have considered the case supported by the documentary evidence and its appears that the Complainant being a consumer is covered by the provision of the Consumer Protection Act under the given facts and circumstances the Op. is found to have failed to give service to the Complainant in terms of the agreement. Thus, it is a fit case established by the Complainant to the effect that the allegation of deficiency of service against the Op. is proved.

           

                                                Contd……………P/3

 

 

– ( 3 ) -

               Hence,

                            It is ordered,

                                               that the Complainant case be and the same is allowed ex-party. The Complainant do get the insured amount payable by the Op.

The Op. S.B.I. is here by directed to pay Insurance benefit 66% in the loan account no. 31529042032 of Complainant Sadhan Chandra Dhara within 60 days from this date of order in default the Complainant is in liberty to proceed the matter before the Forum, in accordance with the provision of law in this behalf.

                       

  Dic. & corrected by me                                                                                              

                                                                                                                                  President

                                                                                                                              District Forum

            Member                                                                                                 Paschim Medinipur.  

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.