The Complainant has filed this case against the O.P. praying for necessary direction upon the O.P. to hand over his tractor further & for, direction upon the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs. 2,14,400/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fourteen Thousand Four Hundred Only) towards the mental agony & pain suffered by him & also praying for further direction to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) towards the cost of the present litigation, & also prays for interest accrued on the awarded amount @ 12% p.a. from the date of cause of action till actual realization, also prays for a direction against the O.P. to pay Rs. 2,64,400/- (Two Lakhs Sixty Four Thousand Four Hundred Only) along with the interest accrued on the awarded amount @ 12% p.a.
The brief facts of the case is that, the complainant approached the O.P. for an agricultural loan for purchasing a tractor loan was sanctioned the complainant took delivery of tractor showing the documents of hypothecation of the O.P.’s Bank the complainant as per terms of agreement of loan paid the whole amount to the O.P. Bank on 20.11.2021 when Rinn Samadhan Bank Adalat was held the O.P. Bank issued a certificate to the complainant on 20.11.2021 that the loan had been settled. The further case of the complainant is that, before issuing the no dues certificate the complainant was instructed to bring the tractor along with key, which the O.P. will give back the complainant on 20.11.2021. The complainant paid the entire dues to the O.P. and the O.P. took some signatures from the complainant without giving any understanding on 24.12.2021 complainant when to the O.P. ask for returning the Tractor along with the key, but the O.P. did not paid any heed, subsequently on 27.12.2021 the complainant issued a notice upon the O.P. through his Advocate stating all the facts, gave 7 days time for making reply, but the O.P. did not give any answer. The complainant in his complaint has also stated that the cause of action arose on 24.12.2021 and thereafter, on all subsequent dates.
Notice was sent from this Commission upon the O.P. O.P. appears before this Commission filed their Written Version denied all the material allegation of the complainant. In the Written Version the O.P. has specifically stated that on receipt of the loan amount through Rinn Samadhan, the O.P. Bank issued no dues certificate on the Loan Account, they also handed over 6(Six) number of original title deeds on 23.11.2021 and also handed over the Tractor Vide RoC being no. WB71-8399 on 24.11.2021 to the complainant after proper inspection conducted by a technician of the complainant. The O.P. Bank has also stated that the complainant has filed this case for misleading the Commission on some false allegations and the complaint is requires to be dismissed.
In order to prove the case the complainant has filed some Xerox Copy of document which are given bellow:-
- Xerox Copy of Postal Receipt regarding proof of delivery,
- Xerox Copy of Postal Receipt,
- Xerox Copy of Postal Track Receipt,
- Xerox Copy of postal Advocate Notice.
In order to falsify the case of the complainant, the O.P. Bank has filed some document which are given bellow:-
- Acknowledgement letter dated 23.11.2021
- Acknowledgement letter dated 24.11.2021
- No dues certificate dated 20.11.2021
- Legal heir certificate of Late Baldev Biswas & Late Rajen Biswas, dated 23.11.2021, issued from Sukhani Gram Panchayet.
Points for consideration
- Whether the complainant is a consumer?
- Whether the case is maintainable under the C.P. Act 2019?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service in the part of the O.P. as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get any award and relief as prayed for as per the prayer of the complaint?
All the points are taken up together for discussion to avoid unnecessary repetition and for the sake of convenience and brevity of this case.
The complainant to prove his case filed deposition in chief in the form of an affidavit. In the deposition in chief of the complainant, he has stated that he took a loan from the O.P. Bank for purchasing a tractor and subsequently when the Rinn Samadhan Bank Adalat was held on 20.11.2021 he paid the entire amount as per terms of settlement to the O.P, on receipt of the entire amount the O.P. issued a certificate to the complainant on 20.11.2021 stating that the loan has been settled. In the written deposition Para No. 7, the complainant has also stated that before issuing the certificate, the O.P. asked the complainant to take back the tractor as well as the key within 2/3 days there from, and the O.P. took some signature from the complainant without giving any instruction or explaining the contents of the documents ask to sign and the O.P. taking advantage of his position practice unfair trade practice by preparing documents. The complainant in his deposition has also stated that he went to the premises of the O.P. for taking back his tractor and lastly on 24.12.2021 the complainant met the O.P. but the O.P. Bank did not return the tractor with the key to him.
The O.P. files written deposition in the form of an Affidavit as well as Written Argument where they stated that only to harass the O.P. the complainant has filed this case knowingfully well aware that the complainant has no locus standi to file the instant case. It is further argument of the O.P. that the complainant has paid the settled amount to the Bank Authority and immediately after payment of the settled amount the O.P. handed over the tractor, key and other title deeds after receiving signature of the complainant. By filing Written Argument the O.P. praying for dismissal of this case imposing cost against the complainant.
Having heard, the Ld. Advocates of both the sides and on perusal of the B.N.A. filed by the complainant as well as the O.P, it is admitted fact that as per settlement of Rinn Samadhan Bank Adalat the complainant has paid the claim amount to the O.P. From the document filed by the O.P. it reveals that the tractor being no. WB71/8399, engine no. A51960, chasis no. 912613076584 with key was handed over to the complainant on 24.11.2021. It is not denied by the complainant that the deed no I-5461 dt. 17.09.1970, deed no. I-2638 dt. 20.04.1967, deed no. I- 2245 dt. 04.01.2003, deed no. I-2185 dt. 07.08.1998, deed no. I-2391 dt. 05.09.1996 were not handed over to the complainant or legal heirs of the deceased persons.
From the record it is also not found that the complainant denied his signature which is found on the document dt. 24.11.2021 regarding delivery of tractor in question along with its key. It is not proved by the complainant as to why he put his signature on several papers given by the O.P without satisfying its contents.
From Perusal of the Written deposition in chief of both the sides and on perusal of the Brief Notes of Argument as well as documents filed by the parties it is admitted fact that the O.P. Bank has filed one document before this Commission wherefrom it is clear that the complainant took the Tractor along with the key from the O.P. on 24.11.2021. Moreover, the complainant did not challenge the signature lying on the document dated 24.11.2021 regarding handing over the tractor along with its key.
Considering all we are of the view that, the complainant has failed to prove its case against the O.P.
Hence it is therefore,
O R D E R E D
That the instant Case being in No- CC No. 05/2022 be and the same is dismissed on contest but without any cost.
