DATE OF FILING : 17-06-2013..
DATE OF S/R : 03-12-2013.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 05-12-2014.
Sri Palash Das,
son of late Prasanta Kumar Das,
residing at village & P.O. Gobendapur, P.S. Shyampur,
District – Howrah,
PIN – 711314………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
The Chairman,
State Bank of India,
having its registered office at
State Bank Bhawan, Corporate Centre,
Madame Cana Marg,
Mumbai – 400021.
The Regional Manager,
State Bank of India,
having its regional office at
1, Samridhi Bhawan, StrandRoad,
Kolkata – 700001.
The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Uluberia Branch, having its branch office at
U. J.Road, P.O. Uluberia, District – Howrah,
PIN – 711315. ……………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
- The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant has prayed for direction upon the o.p. nos. 1, 2 & 3 to pay compensation for Rs. 2 lacs for harassment and humiliation and Rs. 50,000/- as litigation costs as the o.ps. in spite of granting educational loan, term loan of Rs. 1,86,000/- at a floating rate at 12.75% interest, refused to remit the installments to the institute and thereby violated the agreement.
- The o.ps. in their written version contended interalia that the complainant was a defaulter in payment of loan; that the bank authority acted in terms of the agreement dated 30-06-2007 ; that the complainant availed of a sum of Rs. 1,26,120/- out of Rs. 1,86,000/-; that no demand notice was sent since the month of October,2009 by the institute to the bank. So the complaint should be dismissed.
3. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the complainant availed our educational loan while he was a student of B. Tech at Bankura Unnayan Institute of Engineering for the year 2006 to 2010 from the o.p. bank. As per the prayer of the complainant in the month of June, 2007 loan was sanctioned to the tune of Rs. 1,86,000/- vide agreement dated 30-06-2007 @ of Rs. 12.75% floating rate of interest p.a., repayable through 60 E.M.I. of Rs. 4,208/- after one year of the completion of the course of after six months after getting job or whichever is earlier. The semester fees of the institute used to be released regularly as per demand notice by the institute.
- Now the question arises if the o.p. bank is guilty of deficiency of service. On scrutiny of the record, we trace no demand notice after 02-05-2009 issued by the institute. If the claim for any fees is not sent, the o.ps. bank cannot be held responsible. On the contrary, the complainant maintained studied silence for the subsequent period till 2013. Therefore, we trace no deficiency in service by the o.p. bank. So the complainant cannot have any legs to stand upon. We are, therefore, of the view that the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Both the points are accordingly disposed of.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 238 of 2013 ( HDF 238 of 2013 ) be and the same is dismissed on contest but in view of the circumstances without costs.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( T.K. Bhattacharya )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
