Date of filing - 06.04.2015.
Date of final order - 30.06.2016.
Sk. Rahamat Ali,
S/o.Sk. Mahamad Erfan,
Vill.-Mahartuba, P.O.-Mongalkote,
P.S.-Mongalkote, Dist.-Burdwan, Pin-713147. Complainant
-VERSUS-
1. UCO Bank, having its branch office at Nutanhat,
P.O.-Nutanhat, P.S.- Mongalkote, Dist.-Burdwan,
Pin-713147, West Bengal, represented by
its Branch Manager.
2. UCO Bank, having its Head office at 10, BTM Sarani,
(Brabourne Road Road), Kolkata, Pin-700 001, Opposite Parties
represented by its Chairman.
Present : Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kr. Mandal
Hon’ble Member : Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha
Appeared for the Complainant: Ld. Advocate Debdas Rudra.
Appeared for the Opposite Parties: Ld. Advocate Soham Som.
JUDGEMENT
This is a case U/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 for an award directing the O.Ps. to receive the seven installments @ Rs.7750/- in two installments after proper calculation of interest as per terms of sanction letter, to pay Rs.5000/- as part of the loan amount which was not paid to the complainant, along with interest to the complainant, to issue clearance certificate against BSKP
-1-
-2-
loan and to return back the original deed which has been kept by the O.Ps. in their custody as mortgage for the purpose of realization of the loan amount, to pay Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation for mental pain and agony and to pay Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost.
The complainant’s case in short is that the complainant made application along with required documents before the Bangla Swanirbhar Karmasansthan Prakalpa (Atmamaryada), a society for Self Employment of Unemployed Youth, West Bengal, for BSKP loan of Rs.5,00,000/- to run his business of Submersible Pump with fan spare parts purchase and sale. Said loan was sanctioned on 22.4.2010, as per scheme, on the condition that out of the total cost of Rs. 5,00,000/- of the project , the O.P. Bank will pay Rs.3,50,000/- as loan, the Government of West Bengal will pay 20% of such total cost as subsidy and the complainant himself will contribute 10% of such total cost of the project, as per terms & conditions of the said sanction order the complainant had liability to repay the loan amount along with interest @ 11.75% p.a. in sixty(60) equal monthly consecutive installments @ 7750/- and the payment of the installments will start on and from the month of July, 2010. The O.Ps. violating the terms of the scheme kept the complainant’s title deed as mortgage of the property of the deed and three certificates of Market Plus-1 for Rs.30,000/- each as security of the loan. The Government of West Bengal has paid 20% of the total loan amount i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- as per terms of scheme and the complainant contributed by deposited Rs.50,000/- in the loan account but the O.Ps. Illegally disbursed total Rs.4,95,000/- in place of Rs.5,00000/-. So, the complainant is entitled to get Rs.5000/- as part of sanctioned amount of loan from the O.Ps. The complainant paid the 53 installments @ Rs.7750/- regularly and there was no latches on the part of the complainant in payment of EMI. Suddenly the complainant received a notice from Lock Adalat in connection with case No.190/2015 which was started on the basis of the prayer of the O.Ps. By said notice the complainant was asked to appear before the Lok Adalat in the complex of the Court of Ld. District Judge, Burdwan on 14.2.2015. The complainant appeared on said date and the case was placed for settlement in the Lok Adalat. During the course of hearing the complainant came to know that outstanding balance of loan account was Rs.1,38,085/- and the complainant had liability to repay the same. The complainant made protest and intimated that the complainant had only liability to pay only seven installments @ Rs.7750/- p.m. The complainant has also expressed his desire to pay the remaining seven EMI amounting to Rs.54,250/- as early as possible in two monthly installments to close the said account. The complainant made requests on several times to the O.Ps. to look into the matter and to permit him to pay such amount of Rs.54,250/- in two equal monthly installments. But the O.Ps. did not pay any heed. The complainant came to know from the Zonal Office that as per Bank’s Computer Record the complainant would have to pay 36 EMI @ Rs.11,049/- and interest @ 14% towards the repayment of said loan which is completely different from the sanctioned letter and beyond the knowledge of the complainant. The O.Ps. illegally imposed penal interest on the outstanding dues at the time of payment of each and every EMI without the knowledge of the complainant. The complainant deposited two installments dated 2.12.2010 and 4.4.2014 but the same was not deposited in the loan account. By sending letters also the complainant requested the O.Ps. to look into the matter and to permit the complainant to repay the amount
-3-
of rest seven installments in two equal monthly installments. But the O.Ps. did not pay any heed. There was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and for the illegal act of the O.Ps. the complainant has been suffering irreparable loss and harassment and also has been forced to come before this Forum for relief. So, the complainant is entitled to get compensation amounting to Rs.4,00,000/- and to get litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.
Hence, this case with the prayer as mentioned above.
The O.Ps. contested this case by filing written version while stating inter-alia that the case is not maintainable, the complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the case is barred by limitation. It has been further stated by these O.Ps. that there was no circular where it has been mentioned that the Bank will not be able to take the house building as well as any property as mortgage against any Government sponsored loan which is more than one lack, the O.Ps. have taken the complainant’s house building as mortgage against the complainant’s BSKP loan amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- out of total project cost of Rs.5,00,000/-, as per terms of the scheme and sanctioned letter, the complainant had liability to repay the loan amount in sixty(60) EMI @ Rs.7750/- total Rs.4,65,000/- but the complainant did not pay the EMI properly, accordingly, penal interest was charged, the O.Ps. have already intimated the complainant that due to technical error the outstanding dues of the complainant in advertently has reflected at Rs.1,22,585/- plus interest from 31.12.2013 and intimating such technical error, the O.Ps. requested the complainant through letter and verbally to pay only Rs.54,250/- which is the total amount of seven installments due according to the terms of sanctioned letter, to close his loan account but the complainant did not pay the same, the O.P. bank is ready to receive such Rs. 54,250/- which is the total amount of seven installments due, in two consecutive equal monthly installments as per prayer of the complainant and to close the loan account of the complainant and also to return the deed vide No.I-804 dated 3.3.2006. It has been also stated by these O.Ps. that they have already paid the total loan amount which is 70% of the total project cost of Rs.5,00000/-, the complainant deposited the installments dated 2.12.2010 and 4.4.2014 without mentioning his name in the voucher slips and accordingly said installments was not deposited to the complainant’s loan account and subsequently on enquiry and verification, the O.Ps. deposited the said amount to the loan account and no penal interest was charged, till this day the complainant has not paid the outstanding dues, the O.Ps. have no liability to pay Rs.5000/- as part of the loan amount, Rs.4,00000/- as compensation and Rs.25,000/- as litigation cost to the complainant. It is, therefore, claimed by these O.Ps. that the complaint case is liable to be dismissed with cost.
DECISIONS WITH REASONS
To prove his case the complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit along with several documents connected with the loan account as mentioned including sanction letter and the statement of the loan account. On the other hand the O.Ps. have also adduced evidence on affidavit and documentary evidence.
-4-
We carefully perused the evidence on record. Considering the pleadings and evidence on record it appears that the complainant’s case that the complainant made application along with required documents before the Bangla Swanirbhar Karmasansthan Prakalpa (Atmamaryada), a society for Self Employment of Unemployed Youth, West Bengal, for BSKP loan of Rs.5,00,000/- to run his business of Submersible Pump with fan spare parts purchase and sale, said loan was sanctioned as per scheme on the condition that out of total cost of Rs. 5,00,000/- of the project, the O.P. Bank will pay Rs.3,50,000/- as loan, the Government of West Bengal will pay 20% of such total cost as subsidy and the complainant himself will contribute 10% of such total cost of the project, on 22.4.2010, as per terms & conditions of the said sanction order the complainant had liability to repay the loan amount along with interest @ 11.75% p.a. in sixty(60) equal monthly consecutive installments @ 7750/- and the payment of the installments will start on and from the month of July, 2010, has not been challenged by the contesting O.Ps. The complainant has brought a specific case that two installments paid on 2.12.2010 and 4.4.2014, were not deposited in the loan account. On the other hand the O.Ps. have stated that as the complainant did not mentioned his name in the voucher slips, said amount was not deposited in the loan account. But subsequently after verification, said amount was deposited in the loan account without charging any penal interest. During the course of hearing the Ld. Advocate for the complainant has not challenged this statement of the O.Ps. The complainant’s further case that Rs.5000/- out of said Rs.5,00,000/- was not paid to the complainant. On carefully perusing the bank statement, it appears that the O.Ps. paid such project cost of Rs.5,00,000/- in four phases, in the first phase on 6.5.2010 the O.Ps. paid Rs.3,00,000/-, in the second phase on 29.7.2010 the O.Ps. paid Rs.1,00,000/-, in third phase on 27.8.2010 they paid Rs.95,000/- and in the lastly phase on 2.9.2010 they paid Rs.5000/- by deducting said amount along with interest of Rs.618/-, total Rs.5,618/- as processing charge. So, we are of the opinion that the entire loan amount was duly paid to the complainant. As per terms of sanction order the complainant had liability to repay the loan amount along with interest @ 11.75% p.a. by sixty consecutive equal monthly installment @ Rs.7,750/- and payment of installment will start from the month of July, 2010. The evidence on record shows that the complainant started payment of installments more or less one year after the stipulated time and he has paid total 53 EMI @ Rs.7,750/-. From it, it is clear that there was latches on the part of the complainant in the matter of repayment of the outstanding balance of the loan account. The evidence on record clearly show that there was some deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. in the matter of calculation of the loan account and in the matter of depositing the two installments dated 2.12.2010 and 4.4.2014. During the course of argument both the parties admitted that the O.Ps. subsequently rectified such defects by depositing the said two installments in the loan account of the complainant without charging any interest and rectifying the calculation. In para-23 to 26 of the written version the O.Ps. have stated that they are not willing to impose any penal interest for the fault on the part of the complainant and they want to close the account on receiving the due amount of Rs.54,250/- by two consecutive equal monthly installments, accepting the demand of the complainant. During the course of argument, the Ld. Advocate for the complainant has submitted before this Forum that a direction may be given to the complainant to repay such outstanding balance of Rs. 54,250/- by
-5-
two consecutive equal monthly installments and a direction may be given the O.Ps. to close the loan account after receiving such amount, to issue clearance certificate and to return back the original deed vide deed No.I-804 dated 3.3.2006 which has been kept in the custody of the O.Ps. The Ld. Advocate for the O.Ps. has raised no objection against this submission. So we have no hesitation to accept such submission of the Ld. Advocate of the complainant considering the interest of the complainant.
Accordingly the case succeeds in part.
Fees paid is correct.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
that the C.C. No.95/2015 is allowed in part on contest against the O.Ps. Accordingly, an award is passed directing the complainant to pay total Rs.54,250/- as outstanding dues of the loan account to the O.Ps. in two consecutive equal monthly installments payable within the 15th of the month of July, 2016 and within the 15th of the month of August, 2016, failing which the case will stand as dismissed on contest and the O.Ps. are directed to close BSKP loan as mentioned above on receipt of the amount of Rs.54,250/- from the complainant and to issue clearance certificate connected with said BSKP loan and to return the original deed vide deed No. I-804 dated 3.3.2006 to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of said outstanding due of Rs.54,250/- from the complainant, failing which the complainant will be at liberty to execute this order in accordance with law.
Let the copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
Dictated and corrected by me. President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Asoke Kr. Mandal)
President
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
(Sri Pankaj Kr. Sinha)
Member
D.C.D.R.F., Burdwan
