Orissa

Jajapur

CC/30/2016

Satyabhama Das - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,SBI,Jajpur Town Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

Ld.Adv

23 Aug 2017

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                        Present:      1.Shri Jiban ballav Das , President

                                                                            2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                            3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.                       

                                              Dated the 23^rd  day of August,2017.

                                                      C.C.Case No.30 of 2016

Satyabhama Das  W/O Late Bira kishore Das  

Vill.  Akhuasahi , P.O. Narangochha

 P.S.Mangalpur , Dist.-Jajpur.                                                                            …… ……....Complainant .                                                                       .

                   (Versus)

The Branch Manager, State bank of India , jajpur Town Branch

At/P.O/Dist. Jajpur.

                                                                                                                            ……………..Opp.Parties.                  

For the Complainant:                   Sri S.N.Rana, Sri P.K. Rout, Advocates

For the Opp.Parties :                    Sri P.K.Daspattnaik, Advocate.

                                                                                                         Date of order:   23.08.2017.

SHRI  PITABAS MOHANTY,  MEMBER  .

Deficiency in banking service is the grievance of the complainant.

            The fact of the dispute in brief is that the husband of the petitioner had taken a pension loan amounting to Rs.4,00,000/ from the O.P . on 30.10.15 , The EMI was fixed to Rs.9,100/ per month. Accordingly the O.P  was debiting   Rs.9,100/ per month from the pension  account of the petitioner husband . The petitioner’s husband is getting  pension of  Rs. 22,100/ per month.  It is stated by the petitioner that as  per guide line of S.B.I   family pension loan shows  that a pension holder will pay 33% of loan installment of his pension money.

            In the mean time un fortunately the husband of the petitioner died on  01.1.16 and after that the family pension amount reduced to Rs.13,925/- and was credited on the S.B A/c no. 35550924549  but the O.P  did not allow  the petitioner to draw her pension money from the pension account.  The O.P has also debited  Rs.9.100/ as loan installment  from the petitioner’s  pension account . The petitioner several times requested the O.P to  permit her to draw the pension amount from her pension account. But the O.P did not listen the request of the petitioner who is also ready to deduct  33% pension amount  from  the loan account.

            Accordingly finding no other way  the petitioner knocked the door of this Fora  with the  prayer to direct the O.P  to allow the petitioner to draw her family  pension from her pension account.

            After notices the O.P  appeared through their learned  advocate and  subsequently filed the written versions taking the stand :

That the case is not maintainable in the eye of law and the present petitioner has got no cause of action to file the present proceeding.

2.That deceased Bira kishore Das and wife  Satyabhama Das as borrower and guarantor  have jointly  availed pension loan amounting to Rs.4 lakhs from S.B.I, jajpur Branch . It was mutually agreed that loan will be  repaid on monthly EMI of Rs.9,100/- unfortunately due to  the death of Bira kishore Das his wife Satyabhama Das now drawing  her  family pension @ Rs.14,300/- per month . Taking into consideration of her monthly pension now the O.P  bank deduct only Rs.5,000/-  towards the loan account as monthly installment . In true sense said amount is less than actual EMI  which was fixed  for the  said loan . After  the death of Bira kishore Das  time to time O.P bank has called  her to O.P Bank for the  completion of necessary formalities as per statutory requirement but she never turned up .

3.It is false and baseless allegation made by the complaint petitioner  that the O.P  bank has stopped her family pension after   the death of her husband . Rather taking into consideration  of her monthly pension the bank has made compromise on the E.M.I  loan amount availed by her deceased husband. The O.P bank is  ready and  willing to co-operate with its customer . But the complainant  /customer with  misconceived  fact   filed this case against this O.P only to harass this O.P. For the reason stated above the complaint petition  filed by the complainant  is liable to be dismissed with cost.

            On the date of hearing the advocate for the  complaint is absent we heard the argument from the learned advocate from  the side of the O.P . After perusal of the record along with documents filed from both the sides in details  it is observed that :

1.it is undisputed fact that the petitioner has availed a  pension loan from the O.P (S.B.I, jajpur Town) Branch  and the O.P  had fixed 9,100/  per month as EMI  for repayment of the loan amount  and subsequently deducted the same from the pension amount.

2.it is also a fact that unfortunately when the husband of the petitioner died the family pension was  reduced to Rs.14,300./-.

            In the circumstances the grievance of the petitioner is that the O.P  did not allow her to draw the pension amount from her pension account. And she is ready to deduct  33% of  pension from the pension amount towards  the loan account . On the other hand the O.P has  taken  the stand that after taking into consideration the O.P /Bank now is deducting  Rs.5,000/ from the pension account out of the family pension amount of Rs14,300/-  of the petitioner which is after the  death of her husband. The O.P called her to bank for the completion of the necessary formalities as per statutory requirement but the petitioner never turned up .

            In view of the above pleadings  and documents available  on the record and circumstance of the case we are of the opinion that the petitioner failed to establish  her case against the O.P. Hence we dispose of the complaint as per our observation given below:

O R D E R

The petitioner  is directed to comply the formality immediately  after receipt of the order. The O.P is also directed to  take steps regarding payment of her family pension after completion of formality by the petitioner as per law .No cost.

                        This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 23^rd  day of August,2017. under my hand and seal of the Forum.