JUDGEMENT

 Mr. Purna Chandra Mishra, President.

          Complainant Dambarudhar Sahu has filed this case u/s 35 of the CP Act-2019 alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party for not transferring the sanction loan amount to his account and praying therein for direction to the Opposite Party to deduct a sum of Rs. 23,077/- and Rs. 9000/- towards interest from his loan account and to pay cost and compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- respectively.

1.           Brief fact leading to the case is that the complainant has availed loan of Rs. 2,00,000/- from the Opposite Party for refinancing one Mahindra Tractor. After sanction of loan, the Opposite Party credited a sum of Rs. 1,76,923/- instead of Rs. 2,00000/- and the tenure of the repayment period being 24 months, the OP structured the loan to be repaid in 20 monthly installments. The Opposite Party threatened to seize his tractor for which, he filed this case before this Commission for relief as discussed above.

2.           After receipt of notice, the Opposite Party appeared through his Advocate and filed written statement. In his written statement, the Opposite Party pleaded that the complainant has filed this case by suppressing all the material facts for which the case is liable to be dismissed. It is further pleaded that the complainant had availed a loan of Rs. 3,90,000/- from him which was to be repaid with interest and the agreement value was Rs. 5,38,200/- repayable in 45 monthly installments of which the first EMI is fixed at Rs. 12,400/- and the rest of the EMIs at Rs. 11,950/-. The installment is to be paid on 20^th day of every month. The complainant availed the loan but could not clear up the dues and the Opposite Party to protect the complainants sanctioned a top-up loan of Rs. 2,00000/- out of which a sum of Rs. 1,76,923/- was credited to the customer’s account after adjusting the processing charges and all other pending dues in the previous loan account. The interest in the top-up loan is 18.95% (IRR). It is further stated that the complainant again became a willful defaulter and defaulted to the tune of Rs. 92775/- as on 19.03.2021 in spite of allowing him the moratorium period from March-2020 to August 2020. He has filed this case only to avoid his liability and after obtaining the interim order, he is not repaying the loan for which he prayed for dismissal of the case.

3.           The complainant in his complaint petition has stated that he has availed the loan on 12.11.2018 and the repayment period is 24 months. In the meantime, a period of 4 years and 6 months is going to be completed and the agreement between the parties is already over. Since the agreement period is already over, it is expected that the complainant must have cleared up his dues. There is nothing on record to show the actual position/status of the loan account and if the complainant has not yet cleared up the loan after availing the interim order from this Commission, he is liable to square up his loan immediately. And hence the order.

O R D E R

          The complaint petition is disposed off with direction to the Opposite Party to provide a statement of accounts if the loan is not cleared and the complainant is directed to clear up the loan dues within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the statement of accounts from the OP. The case is accordingly disposed off.