<br /> <br /> <br /> BY SRI.K.VIJAYAKUMARAN ACHARY, PRESIDENT.<br /> <br /> This complaint is filed by complainant directing to opp.party to pay Rs. 75,000/- and other reliefs.<br /> The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows:<br /> The complainant is a Civil Engineer is operating S.B. A/c. No.57009586388 to the opp.party with ATM facility. On 11.7.2005 a sum of Rs.25,000/- was therein his account as balance. On the date North India inconnection with his business purpose he arrive at Chennai and during his hault there he withdrew Rs.1,000/- on 12.7.2005 and Rs.10,000/- on 13.7.2005 through the ATM. Thus there was a balance of Rs. 14,000/- in his account as on 13.7.2005. On reaching to Rajkot in Gujarath the complainant attempted to withdraw the money from his account by way of ATM on 20.7.2005. But he could not withdrawn any amount and the replay shown in the ATM was not available balance nil despite several attempts he could not withdrew any amount. Thereupon he contacted the opp.party over telephone and opp.party informed that there was some dues outstanding in connection with the SSI loan from the opp.party branch and therefore advise them to deposit Rs,2,000/- to make available to ATM facility. Accordingly he contacted his house in his native place and a deposit to Rs.2,000 was made on 21.7.2005 . Even after that the complainant could not withdrew any amount through SBT, ATM the report always was balance available was 00-00 on all such occasions it was clearly show that an amount of Rs.14,000/- was balance with the account of the complainant . Because of it the complainant had no proper shelter or food and lost all amenities expected in his business trip The complains ant started his journey solely releasing on the amount in his SB Account and ATM facility assured by the opp.party. The opp.party has no right to freeze the transaction lth loan of Rs.85,000/- availed by the complainant’s SSIs purpose which is a long term one for which the repayment period s was 5years. All the hardships pain and sufferings from the complainant during the trip to Gujarath solely due negligent act of the opp.party which the opp.party is bound compensation. Hence the complaint.<br /> Opp.party filed version contending, interalia, that the complainant is not maintainable either in law on or facts and the same is liable to be dismissed inlimine. The complainant approached the opp.party for a loan under Prime Minsters Rozgar Yojana [PMRY} for conducted unemployed youth. He applied the loan for starting business of wooden furniture. A sum of Rs.85,000/- was sanction as loan on 17.5.2004 for the above business it was availed by the complainant. As security for the repayment of the loan amount the complainant executed an agreement for composite loan infavour of the opp.party by which hypothecated the goods, machinery, book debts and other assets with the bank. The loan was to be repaying in 60 instalments at the rate of Rs.1,850/- The first instalments of repayments of commence from 17.8.2004 the rate of interest was 11% per annum. The complainant violated the terms of the loan amount committed before repayment of instalments. He was also withdrawn and sold entire stock machinery, wooden and other assets in his business place without knowledge of the consent of the opp.party. Despite several payment the complainant did not closed the loan amount . Since the complainant failed to repay the dues in his PMRY loan he has no right to withdraw any amount from his SB account. The averments in para No 2 of the complaint is admitted but the bank has goy general lien on his account under the provisions of law and the conditions stipulated in the agreement . The averments in the para 3 to 8 are denied. There is no negligence on the part of the opp.parlty. Hence the opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Points that would arise for consideration are:<br /> <br /> [i] Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party.<br /> [ii] Reliefs and costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> For the complainant PW.1 is examined. Ext. P1 to P6 are marked<br /> <br /> <br /> For the opp.party DW.1 is examined. Ext.D1. toD9 are marked.<br /> <br /> <br /> Points:<br /> <br /> <br /> The grievance of the complaint is that the opp.party withhold the amount deposited by him in his SB account in connection with his business tour with North Indian because of which he could not withdrawn the money from his SB account using his ATM card. While he was away from home at Rajghot which resulted in great hardship to him . The contact of the opp.party amount to negligence and deficiency in service. As a matter of fact the complainant operate a n SB Accojnt with the opp.party with ATM facility is not deposited. It is also not in dispute that the complainant has availed a PMRY loan of Rs.85,000/- evidence by Ext.P1 to P3 from the opp.party bank for starting a wooden furniture business and that the above loan was pending during the above period huge arrears was there and therefore the amount in the SB account was withheld in the provision of Ext. D7. Now the question is whether the withholding of the amount in the SB account of the complainant by the opp.party amounts negligence or the deficiency in service. Ext. D7 is the agreements executed by the complainant infavour of the opp.party for composite term loan at the time availing the loan. The execution of Ext. D1 is not dispute by the complainant . The first proviso to Ext.D7 agreements lays down that if payment of any one instalments is defaulted on the due date. The bank shall at its description recover entire balance amount due under the account in lump sum with interest costs etc. The 8th proviso enable the bank at all times to apply any other money or monies in its hands standing to the credit or belonging to the borrowers in or towards payments of any amount for the time being payable to the bank on the said composite loan. According to the opp.party they have withheld the amount in the SB account of the complainant under the above provisions.<br /> <br /> The complainant is infact admitted that there was some default in repayment of the said instalments of the loan amount. Ext. D8 Statement of account also shows that as on 31.5.2007 a sum of Rs.1,03, 364 was outstanding due from the complainant to the opp.party bank. . The learned counsel of the opp.party submitted that there was no collateral security for the above loan.Ext.D9 joint inspection report produced by the opp.party which shows that the complainant has closed down his wooden furniture business and sold the machinery and articles without informing the bank and this facts was notice when official of the bank and an official of District Industrial Centre, Kollam visiting the premises. No the complainant would challenge the facility to Ext. D9 he did not produce any material worth believable to show that the business was still running as on the date of inspection from which the only interference that can be drawn is that Ext.D9 is true. The complainant has no case that the officials who submitted Ext.D9 was any invity towards him. According to the complainant as there was huge arrears outstanding against the loan and since the complainant closed down in the business and sold the machiners and articles. And as there was no collateral security to reliase the loan amount they have withhold the amount in the SB account of the complainant invoking the proviso 1 and 8 of Ext. D7. It is to be noted that power of the opp.party to invoke provisions the proviso Ext.D7 in discrepancies and this discretion cannot be called in question. Since the complainant being defaulter of the loan he cannot be loan the opp.party shall not exercised discretion against him. In perusal of the entire evidence we are of the view that there is negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party. Point found accordingly. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> In the result the complaint is dismissed. In the circumstances we make no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated this the 30th day of April, 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> I N D E X<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the complainant<br /> PW.1. – Shibu Panicker<br /> <br /> List of documents for the complainant<br /> P1. – Ticket<br /> P2. slips<br /> P3. – Telephone bill<br /> P4. – <br /> P5. – Passbook<br /> P6. – Current account pass book<br /> <br /> List of witnesses for the opp.party<br /> DW.1. – Vijayan<br /> <br /> List of documents for the opp.party<br /> D1. – Application<br /> D2. – Application submitted by the complainant<br /> D3. – Application for equipment<br /> D4. – Affidavit dt. 117.5.2004<br /> D5. – Certificate of Village Officer<br /> D6. – Sanction letter.<br /> D7. – Agreement<br /> D8. – Statement of Account<br /> D9. – Joint inspection report.<br /> <br />