Orissa

Debagarh

CC/59/2017

The President, Maa Mahamayee SHG - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Utkal Grameen Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Me. S. Dehury &Mr. K.B. Meher

18 Feb 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DEOGARH

C.C. Case No- 59/2017

Present-        Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan, Member (W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.

 

The President,

MAA MAHAMAYEE SHG,

At-Khaparsahi, Ward No-1

P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh.-768108.                                                  ...Complainant

                                                               Versus

The Branch Manager,

Utkal Gramya Bank, Deogarh.

P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh.                                                                … Opposite Party

 

Counsels :-

For the Complainant:                   Sri Sarangdhar Dehury,Advocate,

For the          O.P:                           Sri Sribatsha Mishra,Advocate,

 

DATE OF HEARING: 18.01.2020, DATE OF ORDER: 18.02.2020.

Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President-       Brief facts of the case is that the Complainant is presently working as President of “Maa Mahamayee SHG” at Deogarh. She applied for loan under SWARNA JAYANTI SAHARI ROZGAR YOJANA (SJSRY), meant to provide gainful sustainable employment to the under-employed or unemployed urban BPL youths through setting up of Self-Employment with the Sponsorship of local Municipal Authorities. The Executive Officer, Deogarh Municipality sponsored and sanctioned the loan amount of Rs. Rs.3,00,00/- in favour of the said SHG  under DWCUA GROUP through the O.P. The subsidy amount is said to be disbursed only after following certain terms and condition. The Executive Officer, Deogarh Municipality deposited the subsidy fixed by the Govt. amounting to Rs.90,000/- which is 30% of the loan, in the head of the O.P. The Complainant has already repaid an amount of Rs.1,51,170/- till dtd. 29.04.2014 to loan account with the O.P within three years of sanction of loan.  The Complainant claims that the O.P has told that the time period of loan repayment is 5(five) years but the subsidy amount will be released in her/their favour only after completion of three (03) years of disbursement of loan as the Complainant with a good faith had signed on the blank agreement which was claimed to be filled by the O.P afterwards. Though the Complainant has already paid major portion of  the loan amount within three years, the subsidy is not released by the O.P even after several request made by the Complainant/SHG. Hence she stopped further payment of installments. She could not utilize the subsidy amount for their business purposes and had to face severe financial setback. But according to the O.P, the subsidy amount of Rs.90,000/-is to be kept with him in a reserve fund and it will be given only after proper utilization of funds, prompt repayment and maintaining the asset in good conditions for five years term from the date of sanction of loan. As the SHG has failed to submit any project report, details of expenditure with the O.P and never repaid the loan timely she has lost the opportunity. Again the Complainant has to pay Rs 60,000/- annually for five years towards installment. But the account of the Complainant (SHG) is showing a debit of Rs.1,45,826/- as on dtd. 09.02.2018. Again the subsidy amount which was in the heads of account of the O.P for the SHG, is erroneously returned to the accounts of the Project Director, DRDA, Deogarh along with other funds and till today it is not refunded after several requests.

POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-

1. Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.1986?
2. Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service and unfair trade practice to the Complainant?

From the above discussion and material available on records we inferred that the Complainant comes under the purview of consumer of the O.P as she has availed loan from the O.P. According to the guidelines provided by the govt. for the self help groups, the said groups should undergo the basic orientation or the skill training programme and only after the completion of the said training programme the bank shall proceed to disburse the loan  and subsidy amount to them immediately so that they can purchase or create assets. The O.P Banks should ensure through proper monitoring and verification that quality assets have been procured by the Swarozgaris.  In case of non-procurement of assets by the Swarozgari in spite of reasonable time and opportunity, the bank shall be free to cancel the loan and recover the money as mentioned in the SGSY Guidelines. But there is no such training has been given to the SHG, hence they are not able to utilize the fund properly and to create and maintain asset or constructed any project for their business. Again the O.P has not done necessary Post Credit Follow-up to ensure proper utilization of funds/loan. According to guidelines the O.P (Bank branches) may observe one day in a week as non public business working day to enable the staff to go to the field and attend to the problems of Swarozgaris but the O.P has failed to do the needful. Further the repayment period for various activities under SGSY can broadly be categorized into 5, 7 and 9 years depending on the project and the  corresponding lock-in period would be 3, 4 and 5 years respectively. As the Complainant was initially got convinced by the O.P that after three years of payment (Lock–in-period) the subsidy can be released in her favour, hence after three years she claimed the subsidy. The Complainant could be able to repay an amount of Rs.1,51,170/- in three years . As per the guidelines if the loan is fully repaid before the currency period, the Swarozgaris will be entitled only to pro-rata subsidy. “ In case of default in the payment of loan or the group becoming defunct or dissolution of the group and in case the bank fails to recover the entire dues in spite of all possible measures, the process of forfeiture of subsidy for adjustment against dues may be taken up. After getting the approval of District SGSY Committee the concerned bank may adjust the subsidy against the Swarozgaris dues”.  So here the O.P should have taken initiative to adjust the subsidy of Rs.90,000/- after the lock in period  i.e after  three years of sanction of loan and serve a payment notice to the Complainant. Also the O.P has the liberty to initiate Legal proceedings (Civil/Criminal) wherever necessary may be initiated against the Swarozgari and against all members in case of SHG for recovery of loan.  Again the return of subsidy by the O.P to the accounts of P.D, D.R.D.A, Deogarh before the lapse of time period proves a gross negligence in his part which resulted in deficiency in service. Hence from the above it can be inferred that the O.P has committed deficiency in service U/S-2(1)(o) of Consumer Protection Act-1986 as we order as under :-

ORDER

The Complaint Petition is allowed. Under the above circumstances we hereby direct the O.P to update the loan account of the Complainant and take necessary steps to adjust the subsidy amount of Rs. 90,000/- (30% of sanctioned loan of Rs.3,00,000/-) with the outstanding loan amount as per the provision in the SWARNA JAYANTI SAHARI ROZGAR YOJANA (SJSRY) scheme launched by the Govt. and claim the residual amount from the Complainant/SHG. Further the Complainant is directed to co-operate the O.P in every possible way in settlement of the loan amount. All the above direction are to be complied within 60 (Sixty) days from receipt of this order, failing which, the Complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law. No cost as to Compensation is awarded.

 

               Office is directed to supply the free copies of the order to the parties receiving acknowledgement of the delivery of thereof.

               Order pronounced in the open court today i.e. 18^th day of February, 2020 under my hand and seal of this Forum.

 

             I      agree,                                         I     agree,

                                   

          MEMBER(W).                                    MEMBER.                                          PRESIDENT.

 

              Dictated and Corrected

                by me.

 

           PRESIDENT.