IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT S I L I G U R I.

CONSUMER CASE NO. : 100/S/2013.                        DATED : 04.05.2016.            

BEFORE  PRESIDENT              : SRI BISWANATH DE,

                                                              President, D.C.D.R.F., Siliguri.

                      MEMBERS              : SMT. PRATITI BHATTACHARYYA &

                                                              SRI PABITRA MAJUMDAR.

COMPLAINANT                 : SRI MUKUNDA GHOSH,

                                                              S/O Sri Jogesh Ghosh,

                                                              Barapatha, Phansidewa,

  P.O.- Phansidewa, P.S.- Bagdogra,

                                                              Dist.- Darjeeling.

OPs                 1.                     : THE BRANCH MANAGER,

The West Bengal State Co-operative Agriculture                & Rural Development Bank Ltd.,                              Sarat Bose Road, Hakimpara,                                        P.O. & P.S.- Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling.

2.                     : THE BRANCH MANAGER,

The West Bengal State Co-operative Agriculture &   Rural Development Bank Ltd,

Darjeeling Branch,

22, Hill Cart Road, Darjeeling. 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT         : Sri Monojit Roy, Advocate.

J U D G E M E N T

Sri Biswanath De, Ld. President.

The complainant’s case in brief is that he had availed a loan of Rs.1,00,000/- from the OPs against mortgage of his immovable properties under Agriculture Deb Relief Scheme of Govt. of India, but the OPs did not handover copy of the loan agreement/finance agreement to the complainant despite his request for the same.  The complainant paid monthly instalments towards repayment of the loan, along with interest, and he has already paid a sum of Rs.1,01,400/- towards repayment of the loan.  On 30.09.2008 the complainant was in dire financial straits owing to his illness, and accordingly he could not pay instalment for some months.  The complainant went to the office of OP no.1 in April, 2009. And expressed his desire to clear the entire

Contd......P/2

-:2:-

arrears, and asked for statement of accounts so that he could know the amount of such arrears.  But the OP No.1 told him that all the borrowers under the said scheme of the Govt. of India including the complainant had been released from liability to repay the loan amount, and the said loan account of the complainant had been closed, and his credit balance would be refunded to him shortly, and his mortgage property would be released soon.  However, the OP did not refund the credit balance or released his mortgaged properties.  In December, 2012 the complainant received a notice from ld advocate of OP No.2 asking him to repay the dues with respect to the said financial assistance.  The complainant claims that the notice is bad in law, and is misconceived considering that he had been informed that he had been released from the liability to repay the loan.  The complainant accordingly filed this case praying that the OPs be directed to refund him his credit balance of Rs.1,01,400/-, together with interest, and he also prays for refund of other amount to which he is entitled and he further prays that the OPs be directed to release his mortgaged properties.  The complainant also prays for compensation, and cost of litigation.   

The OP has filed written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations raised by the complainant.  OP has stated that OP is a society, it is not a bank or financial institution under the Banking Regulation Act and not under the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India.  It is run by the rules and regulations of West Bengal Co-operatives Acts and Rules.  The society is neither a service provider of any kind nor a trader.  So, Consumer Protection Act is not applicable.

The complainant is a member of the Society.  If any dispute arises between the complainant and the society, then the disputes is to be referred to the Registrar of the Co-operative society.  The ld. Forum has no jurisdiction to try this case.  The other part of this petition is denied by this OP.  It is stated that after availing loan in the year 2002 the party after repeated follow ups made first repayment on 31.03.2005 i.e., 2½ years after availing the loan.  The complainant has repaid on three occasions 31.03.05, 04.02.06 and 30.03.06. These show that the party has no intention to clear this loan timely. 

It is also stated by the OP in para 13 that party repaid Rs.1,05,400/-.  Thereafter Rs.6,355/- and Rs.25,924/- has been credited by the bank to the account of interest subsidy in his loan.  Later Rs.2,885/- in his loan account towards adjustment of interest accrued on his term deposit for Rs.5,000/-

Contd......P/3

-:3:-

which has been kept as a collateral security.  In this way the bank has credited Rs.35.137/- in the account of the complainant.  But the complainant is unaware of this.  In this way the OP reproduces before this Forum that all sorts of cooperation regarding crediting and debiting loan to the complainant has been taken by this OP only for the benefit of the complainant.  But the complainant did not make any connection with the bank OP authority to pay his total loan and to know his actual credit and debit.  In this way the OP has filed a laborious written version and on the point of rules of Co-operative Societies. 

Point for decision

1.       Whether the case is maintainable or not ?

2.       Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP ?

Decision with reason.

All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of the case.

The complainant did not file any paper regarding taking of loan.

Relevant portion of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, 2006, is filed by the OP.  Whereas, the complainant did not file any papers even loan sanction etc.

So, the allegation of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice is not proved.

Moreover, this OP is a society.  The Society is neither is a service provider nor a trader.  So, the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is not applicable against this society. 

So, on ground of act the case is not proved and on ground of law the case is not tenable in law.

So, after deep deliberation of fact and point of law, this Forum is of strong conviction that this case is not allowed.  As such the case is dismissed.  

Hence, it is

                    O R D E R E D

that the Consumer Case No.100/S/2013 is dismissed on contest but without any cost.

Let copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.

­-Member-                        -Member-                           -President-