Date of Filing: 10.09.2013.                                       Date of Disposal:  12.04.2023.

Complainant                :Partha Chatterjee, S/O Lt. Anukul Chatterjee, Residing at Arya Pally, Baranilpur, P.O. Sripally, P.S. & Dist. Burdwan, Pin No. 713103.

-VERSUS -

Opposite Party            :1. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Parbirhata Branch, G.T. Road, P.S. & Dist. Burdwan, Pin-713103.

2. The Sub-Post Master, Rani  Bhabani Katra, Bangalitola , Varanasi,  U.P. 221001.

3. The Sub-Post Master, Sripally Post Office, P.O. Sripally, P.S. & Dist. Burdwan, 723103, W.B.

4. The Sr. Superintendent, Burdwan Head Post Office, Burdwan, 713101.

Present                                   : Mohammad Muizzuddeen             -Hon’ble President.

                                                : Mrs. Lipika Ghosh                         - Hon’ble Member.

Appeared for the Complainant           :Sri Tamal De                          Ld. Advocate.

Appeared for the Opposite Party        :Sri Soham Som                      Ld. Advocate.

Appeared for the O.P. Nos. 3&4        : Sri Shovan Kumar                 Ld. G. P.

FINAL ORDER

            On 10.09.2013 the complainant-Partha Chatterjee, has filed this complaint u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the OPs.

            The case of the complainant, in brief, is that the complainant obtained a home loan in the year 2003 for construction of his own dwelling house and the terms of the loan for repayment was fixed for 10 years. The complainant requested the OP No.1 (S.B.I) to supply the true and correct statement of accounts as early as possible to repay the home loan by the time but the S.B.I. (OP No.1) kept mum and did not supply the same. Then complainant then sent an Advocate’s letter dt. 21.05.2023 and afterwards a reminder was also sent to the OP No.1 on 12.07.2013 but there was no response on behalf of the OP No.1 Bank. The complainant had availed himself of the home loan facilities by assigning Life Insurance Policies, Four numbers of Krishan Vikash Patras. The said Bank failed to collect the amount on maturity of the said Insurance Policy as well as four number of Krishan Vikash Patras to adjust the same against the loan amount due and as such there was inordinate delay on the part of the Bank to adjust the L.I.C. policy as well as Krishan Vikash Patras. On the other hand, the OP Bank sent a notice /order to the complainant vide No. RASMECCC/11-12/NR/1276 dt. 06.08.2013 claiming an arbitrary amount of Rs. 2,35,599.42/- out of which on account of irregularities , Bank has claimed Rs. 1,33,605/- for which the complainant, on being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with, preferred this application . He further stated that the S.B.I. has charged an exorbitant rate of interest including penal interest/irregularities in its book violating the guidelines of the Supreme Court for charging interest, capitalization of interest with a view to preventing certain mal-practices. The numbers of four Krishan Vikash Patras are Vide Nos. 9300771436, 5800866607, 5800866608, 5800866609.

            In spite of several requests to the Bank in encashment and adjustment of loan account they refused to take any action on this matter. As a result, the complainant suffered a huge loss to the tune of Rs. 2, 50,000/- .

            The cause of action arose on and from 21.05.2013.  In this way, the OPs committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practices.

            Upon this background, the complainant prayed for giving a direction to the OPs to pay the full claimed amount of Rs. 2, 50,000/- along with compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant towards mental pain, agony and harassment for the last two years. The complainant also prays to pay interest on insured amount along with a direction to the OP to pay the cost of the present case amounting to Rs. 10,000/-.

            The OP No.1 has filed Written Objection (W.O.). The OP-Post Office has filed Written Version (W.V).

            The OPs contested the case by filing W/Vs denying all the material allegations, contending inter alia that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present case, that the complaint is not maintainable in its present form and character and that the complaint is  suffered from non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties.

            The case of the OP No.1 is that the complainant is a borrower of the OP No.1 who made an application before the OP-Bank for sanctioning a loan for the purpose of his house-building which was sanctioned on 29.03.2004 amounting to Rs. 5, 00,000/- after mortgaging his landed property and executing the necessary documents. In the Arrangement Letter – Housing Finance some terms and conditions were clearly mentioned and upon going through the same, the complainant availed himself of the said loan. The complainant had admitted to pay  interest @ 9% p.a. and it was scheduled to pay the  120 monthly equated installments but the complainant has failed to pay the   installments as per terms and conditions of the loan amount and did not pay the monthly installments regularly and for this reason the Loan Account became N.P.A. account . In spite of repeated reminders, the complainant did not pay the outstanding dues of the said loan i.e. amounting to                  Rs. 1, 85,599.42 accrued interests up to 28.02.2010. Except the mortgaged House Building there are no Kisan Vikas Patras and Insurance Policies. During the sanction of the loan, the complainant admitted he will mortgage the house for the s aid loan and he also admitted to deposit NSC/KVP Certificates of Rs. 60,000/- and one L.I.C. certificate for Rs. 1,00,000/- as collateral securities  but the complainant only mortgaged his house as the security for the loan and did not deposit the above mentioned L.I.C. policy certificate and the certificate of N.S.C/K.V.P which he admitted to deposit as co-lateral securities . As the N.S.C./KVP certificates and the certificate of L.I.C. were not deposited, the question does not a rise for assignment of the above mentioned certificates and the policy nor the encashment and adjustment of the matured amount of the said NSC/KVP certificates and the L.I.C. policy with the loan account. So, the allegations as alleged by the complainant has no leg to stand upon for which the Bank is liable to compensate for their said act as mortgaged house is quite enough as a security against the said loan. For this reason, the OP did not pressurize the complainant to deposit the above mentioned NSC/KVP Certificates and the L.I.C. policy as an additional co-lateral security. As there is no negligence as well as deficiency in service on the part of this OP,   this OP is not liable to make any compensation towards the compensation as well as litigation cost.

            Upon this background, the OP No.1 claims of the dismissal of the case with exemplary costs.

            The specific case of the OP-Post Office is that throughout the averment of the complaint, there is not a single allegation or deficiency in service or unfair trade practice or negligence on the part of the OP Nos. 3 to 4 and as such there cannot be any claim against these OPs. It may also be noted the complainant has not given any particulars about the KVs either of it date of Purchase or its date of Maturity for some malafide purpose and to implead falsely this OP in the present case only for harassment and to malign this activities of the Postal Department. The present complaint of the complainant has not merit at all.

            Upon this background, this OP also claims for dismissal of the case with exemplary costs for harassment. 

Decision with Reasons.

            In order to prove the case, the complainant has filed evidence-on-affidavit. OP Nos. 1, 3&4 filed questionnaire. The complainant has filed replies to those questionnaires. The complainant has filed Xerox copies of documents.

            The complainant has filed Written Notes of Argument (W.N.A) . The OP-Bank had filed W.N.A. on 24.03.2014 and on 20.05.2015.

            The Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redresal Forum on 30.06.2015, after considering the whole case and on hearing of arguments of both sides, has dismissed the complaint on contest and against the said order, an appeal being First Appeal FA/824/2015 was preferred by the complainant against the OP No.1 and on 31.05.2018 the Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C, Kolkata, WB, has been pleased to allow the appeal ex parte against the Respondent in part and the impugned order was set aside. The case was remanded to this District Forum for fresh adjudication of the matter on merit. There was a finding in the order of the appeal that

 The photocopy of loan sanction letter shows that the Respondent received a LIC Policy from the Appellant. In view of this, the Respondent must clarify (1) why did it deny receipt of any Certificate (LIC/NSC/KVP) from the Appellant; (2) whether it encashed the said LIC policy or not. If yes, when did it encash the same and if not, what prompted it to withhold the same till date.

Upon the receipt of the said order, the complaint was amended and the complainant took steps against the other OPs who appeared and filed W/V and contested the case.

Perused the complaint, W/Vs. W.N.A and Xerox copies of the documents.

Admittedly, the complainant took a house building loan from the OP No.1 and the house building was mortgaged before the OP No.1 Bank.

The main dispute in this case is as per allegation of the complainant, he deposited 4-Nos of K.V.Ps being Nos.  9300771436, 5800866607, 5800866608, 5800866609 and one L.I.C. Policy Certificate to meet out the loan outstanding dues by adjusting the same as and when required by the Bank but the Bank-OP No.1 stated that the mortgaging the house building is sufficient security for taking loan and co-lateral security such as certificates of K.V.Ps and L.I.C Policy is not necessary. Furthermore, the Bank also alleged that the complainant did not deposit the Certificates of K.V.Ps and L.I.C. Policy for adjusting the outstanding dues i.e. loan account. As such no question arose for assignment of the above mentioned certificates for encashment and adjustment of the amount from the said certificates with the loan account.  

            Now, we have to look into the matter as to whether Certificates of  4-Nos. of K.V.Ps and one number of L.I.C. Policy were deposited by the complainant at the time of sanctioning his loan or not .

            In respect of the Certificate of L.I.C. Policy, it is stated by both the parties that ultimately the maturity value of the L.I.C. certificate has already been adjusted with the loan account though primarily the OP No.1 Bank has refused that the complainant had deposited the certificate of L.I.C. policy as co-lateral security and in this regard the OP No.1 Bank did not adduce any oral evidence.

 In respect of 4-Nos of K.V.Ps there is no iota of evidence in the record that the said 4-Nos of K.V.Ps were deposited by the complainant to the OP No.1-Bank prior to sanctioning of the loan. Ld. Advocate for the complainant has argued that the Sanction Letter issued by the Bank only discloses that NSC/KVPs of  Rs. 60,000/-  LIC Policy for Rs. 1, 00,000/- S.V. Rs. 40,912/- were deposited by him but it is not revealed that the 4-Nos of K.V.Ps were deposited by him. In the said document (Sanctioned Letter) it is not mentioned that after taking loan the said co-lateral security are to be deposited by the complainant. Column No. 5 of the Arrangement Letter-Housing Finance issued by the Financer discloses that the loan will be secured by:

a). 

b). 

c). 

d). NSC/KVP Rs. 60,000/- LIC Pol. For Rs. 1 lac. S.V. Rs. 40,912/-.

And moreover from there, it is evident that KVPs were amounting to Rs. 60,000/-

            During argument the complainant has stated that at the time of deposition of the said KVPs before the OP No.1-Bank, 2-Nos. of K.VPs amounting to Rs. 10,000/- (each) were returned to the complainant. According to the complainant, KVPs were deposited amounting to Rs. 40,000/- . But no document has been adduced by the complainant in support of his contention. The complainant tried to prove this fact of purchasing of the K.V.Ps from the Post-Office and he sought for some information from the Post Office Sripally Pin-713103 on 22.10.2014 and two questions were in the Information Slip to the effect that (1) Please let me  know whether the said 4-Nos Kisan Vikas Patras were encashed by State Bank of India? (2) If so, then kindly mention the date. The said information has been received by the Office. Unfortunately, the application cannot be processed since KVPs are not purchased from the offices under jurisdiction of Burdwan Division. The information may be collected from SBI, Parbirhata Branch. In spite of information as sought for by the complainant as to whethre to show when the KVPs were purchased from the Sub-Post Master, Rani  Bhabani Katra, Bangalitola , Varanasi,  U.P. 221001, while sending two questions to the Sripalli Post Office, Burdwan, no satisfied answer is forthcoming with this aspect.

            As per order dt. 14.01.2015 some information was called for from the Sub-Post Master, Rani Bhabani Katra, Bangalitola , Varanasi,  U.P. 221001, for the decision of this case and the said information was received on 16.02.2015 wherefrom it appears that Cheque No. 787283 dt. 13.08.2007 was not issued from Baranasi H.O.-221001 (for Post Office Rani Bhawani Katra Varanasi). And answer to another Question No. 2 –In what circumstances such cheque was issued?  Not applicable (as the cheque under reference was not issued from Varanasi H.O). Another Question was: Whether the said cheque was encashed or not?  Information received that question for encashment of cheque under reference does not arise.  The said information was sent by the Office of the Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, East DN. Varanasi-221001. dt. 03.02.2015. In such a situation, it is clear that no such cheque being No. 787283 dt. 13.08.2007 has been issued by the Post Office or encashed by the bank concerned.

            The complainant did not take any step to know whether the said K.VPs were kept as lien with the OP No.1 Bank. It clearly indicates that K.V.Ps were purchased from Varanasi Post Office but for the same, no cheque was issued, as alleged by the complainant being No. 787283 dt. 13.08.2007 by the Rani Bhawani Katra, Varanasi and as the cheque was not issued; the question of encashment of cheque under reference does not arise. Therefore, it can be said that the OP-Bank cannot encash the K.V.Ps to adjust his loan amount in the loan account and again it can be said that the complainant did not take any steps to know whether the KVPs were kept with the OP No.1 Bank as lien and there is no such case in this respect in the complaint. The complainant has filed the Loan Statement issued by the OP-Bank wherefrom it is revealed that the maturity amount of the KVPs was credited at a very belated stage for which the complainant had suffered a monetary loss.

            In this regard, Ld. Advocate for the complainant submits that the Bank failed to credit the amount of KVPs at a very belated stage, cannot be accepted. Therefore, the complainant has miserably failed to prove the deficiency in service, negligence and unfair trade practice and for this reason the complaint is devoid of merits and fails.  The story depicted in the W/V of the OP-Post Offices is believable as in the complaint there is not a single deficiency in service and unfair trade practice or negligence on the part of the OP-Post Offices, rather the OP Nos. 3 & 4 are totally in the dark as there is no nexus in between the OP Nos. 3 & 4 and the complainant in this case.

            Therefore, the case also fails against the OP Nos. 2,3 & 4.   

            Hence, it is

                                                   ORDERED

That the Consumer Complaint No. 212/2013 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against all the OPs but without any cost.

            Let a copy of this order be given to the parties on free of cost.

         Dictated & corrected by me.

                      President

     D.C.D.R.C , Purba Bardhaman.

               Member                                                                                       President

     D.C.D.R.C , Purba Bardhaman.                                               D.C.D.R.C , Purba Bardhaman.