In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 54 / 2009.
1) Nikhil Ch. Karmakar,
L-3/1, Sarsuna Satalite Township, Kolkata-61. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) The Manager, Kotak Mahisdra Bank Ltd.,
15, Park Street, Kolkata-700016.
2) The Manager, Kotak Mahisdra Bank Ltd.,
36-38A, Nariman Bhavan,
227, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 29 Dated 17/05/2012
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Nikhil Chandra Karmakar against the o.ps. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. The fact of the case in brief is that in the month of June, 2006 pursuant to an agreement complainant took loan from o.ps. bank having loan account no.CSG-1056362 and complainant was being forced to sign blank form which was subsequently filled in by o.ps. and complainant started paying EMI amounting to Rs.2834/- by 36 advance cheques being no.488701-488719 and 276684-276700 of State Bank of India, Bakultala Branch which complainant was forced to give at the time of receiving loan and thereafter several criminal proceedings went on for bounce of cheques u/s 138 of N.I. Act. Further case of the complainant is that despite entire payment of the loan amount the documents hypothecated to o.ps. have not returned back to complainant by o.ps. Hence, the case filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case and denied all the material allegations labeled against them. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. submitted in the course of argument that the instant case does not fall within scope and ambit of C.P. Act and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is fact that in the course of proceeding ld. lawyer of o.p. has made endorsement on a petition dt.2.5.12 filed by complainant lying with the record to the effect “Received all payments on loan account no.CSG 1056362”.
That being the position we are of the view that there is no clear dispute so far as the payment is concerned and it is fact that o.ps. had sufficient deficiency in discharging their liabilities being a service provider to their consumer / complainant as is apparent from the materials on record and complainant is entitled to compensation and litigation cost and ‘no due certificate’ and return of his valuable documents lying with o.ps.
Hence, ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to supply copies of documents such as agreement, terms and conditions for calculation sheet and statement of account in details and are further directed to issue ‘no due certificate’ in favour of complainant and are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
____Sd-____ ______Sd-______ ______Sd-________
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
