DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM , BHADRAK
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kara, President
2. Shri Basant Kumar Mallick,Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Dated the 10th day of August,2016
C.D.Case No.83 of 2014
Sri Harihara Sahoo
S/O Late Chandramani Sahoo
Vill- Fatepur , Po/Ps- Bhandaripokhari
Dist- Bhadrak
……………………. Complainant
Versus
- The Manager
-
Bhandaripokhari Branch
At/Po/Ps- Bhandaripokhari
Dist Bhadrak
………………Opp. Parties
For the Complainant: Sri Santosh Kumar Nayak & others, Advocates
For the Opp.Parties No. 1 & 2 : Sri Rabindra Kumar Ray & Others, Advocates
Date of hearing : 18.05.2016
Date of order : 10.08.2016
SRI BASANTA KUMAR MALLICK, MEMBER
The back ground facts disclosed in the complaint are to the effect that the complaint is a costumer of United Commercial Bank , Bhandaripokhari Branch (OP Bank) having availed crop loan and agriculture loan for the purpose of agricultural activities . The OP Bank sanctioned Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) Only as crop loan and on dt. 22.11.2005 and Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) only as agriculture loan on 21.01.2006 , total loan availed by the complainant becomes Rs 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs) . The complainant claims to have been paying the loan installments regularly but the OP Bank has been sending demand notices repeatedly without having any just and proper reason. After receiving notice from the OP Bank , the complainant met the OP in his office and requested to provide him the statement of loan account which yielded no result and the OP Bank did not pay any heed to provide statement of loan account inspite of repeated visit and request. Further the OP Bank was requested to recalculate the interest in the loan account which was also not responded by OP Bank . However on 16.04.2014 the complainant obtained the loan transaction report/statement of loan account from the OP Bank and on verification, it is found that the amount on many occasions deposited by the complainant has not been accounted for to the credit to the loan account is Rs 37,000/- and on other two dates the complainant has deposited Rs 5,500/- an against which an amount of Rs 4,000/- has been credited to his loan account. On having seen the irregularities committed by OP in the loan accounts , the complainant sent a notice through his advocate on dt. 04.08.2014 to know the reason of irregularities and requesting OP to take necessary step for crediting the differential amount of Rs 38,500/- to his loan account but the OP did not respond to the notice and preferred to remain silent on the issue. Finding no other way to get the claim settled, the complainant filed the dispute claiming compensation, cost and crediting of the uncredited amount to his loan account.
OP resisted the compliant and contested the case in stating that the complaint is neither maintainable in law nor in facts . It is stated by the OP that the complainant has availed to business loans of Rs 1, 00,000/- each on dt. 22.11.2006 and 31.01.2006 respectively, as he has stated in the compliant is not at all a fact . The real fact remains that the complainant has availed business term loan from OP Bank which was disbursed on dt 22.11.2005 of Rs 1, 00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) and dt. 31.01.2006 of Rs 1, 00,000/- for his electronic goods Shop-cum-repairing center at Bhandaripokhari Bazar . The afore said loan was repayable in 84 monthly installments@ Rs 3250/- per month commencing from March, 2006. Further the OP has stated that the claim of complainant for waiver of loan under debt waiver and debt relief scheme announced by Govt. of India is devoid of merit as the said scheme covers the agriculture loan only and the complainant being a loanee under Non-Agriculture term loan (Business) scheme can not claim such waiver . Further the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost against the complainant.
It is an admitted fact that the complainant is a costumer/borrower of OP bank since 2005. We have heard the argument of both the parties and perused materials on record . The disputes between the parties regarding purpose of loan availed by the complainant are, (1) Non-Credit of deposit amount to the loan account, (2) debarring the complainant from availing benefits of debt waiver scheme and (3) furnishing of required information inspite of request and servicing of legal notice upon the OP .
As regards purpose of loan, the complainant claims to have availed loan for agriculture purpose but failed to adduce any evidence in support of his pleading. On the other hand the OP Bank submitted that the complaint has availed business term loan of Rs 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh) only and also submitted the copies of loan application form, duly signed and submitted by the complainant on dt. 05.11.2005, sanction letter issued by OP Bank on dt. 22.11.2005 and loan transaction report/statement of loan account. The signature of the complainant appears at the bottom of the said sanction letter as a taken of acceptance of terms and conditions stipulated in the sanction letter , The material evidence available on record proves that the complainant has availed business loan from the OP Bank and hence the allegation raised by the complainant could not be proved confirming the purpose of loan so availed for agriculture purpose .
As regards benefits under debt waiver scheme the complainant could not furnish the circular/scheme of debt waiver and debt relief scheme designed by Govt. of India and the modus operandi circular issued by Reserve Bank of India. The OP in his defense submitted a circular of DW & DR where in it is mentioned that only agriculture including agriculture allied activities loans having status of overdue and NPA (Non-Performing Asset) category would come under the scheme for relief . Since complainant is a borrower under Non-Agriculture .Sector, the OP Bank was undone to extended any type of benefits or relief. Under above premises, the allegation made in the complaint for relief under debt waiver scheme is not proved.
In the matter of not crediting the deposited amount in more than twelve occasions to the loan account of the complainant , it is observed from the loan documents on record furnished by both complainant and opposite party that as many as 11 occasions, the amount deposited by the complainant has not been accounted for in crediting the loan account and in two occasions on dt. 31.10.2008 and 24.02.2009, less amount has been credited to the loan account of the complainant . In these two occasions the complainant has deposited Rs 5,500/- as against which the loan account has been credited with Rs 4,000/- . As such there is a less credit of Rs 1,500/- which is claimed by the complainant . It is pertinent to mention that the complainant has failed to furnish statement of loan account No- 09940601400185, belongs to him maintained with OP Bank , from the date commencement till filing of dispute in this Forum . He has furnished the statement of account from dt. 05.12.2009 as the OP Bank did not supply him the same since inception of loan account . The statement of accounts submitted by the OP does not cover the entire period from the date of opening of the loan account of the complaint till the date of filing the present dispute case . During this gap period from 01.04.2009 to 05.12.2009, the complainant has paid Rs 20,000/- in 8 occasions in the OP Bank, the said amount has not been credited to the loan account of the complainant on the respective dates as reveals from the accounts statement furnished by the OP Bank and the counter foils of deposit challans submitted by the complainant. The complainant claims that the amount of Rs 9,000/- deposited by the complainant to credit his loan account on dt. 28.10.2006, dt. 12.12.2006 and dt. 30.12.2009 has not been taken into account but the statement of accounts speaks that the afore said amount has been credited to the loan account on respective dates . Besides, the OP Bank has not accounted for the amount of Rs 6,000/- deposited by the complainant on 31.12.2007 and 31.12.2008 . Further the complainant has deposited Rs 5,500/- on dt. 31.10.2008 and 24.02.2008 which was not credited to his loan account . In the above manner it is proved that the OP Bank has intentionally not credited Rs 27,500/- to the loan account of the complainant which amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service.
In view of the above facts and circumstances it is observed that the OP Bank has caused unnecessary delay in providing the required information’s to the complainant and failed to credit the deposited amount of the complainant to his loan account . Such actions of the OP is intended to suppress it’s own fault and lapses for which the OP is liable to compensate the loss sustained by the complainant . Accordingly it is order .
ORDER
The complainant be and the same is allowed in part against the OP . OP is directed to credit Rs 27,500/- and interest on actual accrual basic to the loan account of the complainant and to pay compensation of Rs 2000/- for mental agony and harassment and Rs 500/- as litigation cost within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order .
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 10th August- 2016 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
