Tripura

West Tripura

CC/90/2016

Smt. Amrita Sarkar (Ghosh) & Sri Samir Ghosh. - Complainant(s)

Versus

United Bank of India, Regional Office & G.B.Hospital Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. K.K.Pal, Mr. B.K.Nath.

02 Mar 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

    CASE NO:  CC-  90 of  2016

1. Smt. Amrita Sarkar(Ghosh),
W/o- Sri Pinaki Ghosh,

2. Sri Samir Ghosh,
S/O- Lt. Gour Netai Ghosh,

Residents of:
Ramkrishna Palli, ITI Road,
P.O. Kujaban, P.S. New Capital Complex,
Agartala, District- West Tripura.          ............. Complainants.

             ___VERSUS___

1. United Bank of India,
Regional Office, Tripura,
Represented by its
DGM & Chief Regional Manager,
Durgabari Road, Agartala, Tripura.

2. United Bank of India,
G.B. Hospital Branch,
Represented by the Branch Manager,
P.O. Kujaban, P.S. New Capital Complex,
Agartala, West Tripura.             ........ Opposite parties.

      __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

C O U N S E L

For the complainant    : Sri Kishore Kr. Pal,
                  Sri Bimal Kanti Nath,
                  Advocates.                  
For the O.Ps            : Sri Amitabha Roybarman,
                  Smt. Leena Sarkar,
                   Advocate.         
                  
        JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 02.03.2017

J U D G M E N T

        This case  filed by one Amrita Sarkar and 2 others U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. Petitioners case in short is that as per the recommendation of Industries Department, Tripura Rs.7 lac was sanctioned as loan to the petitioner under PMEGP  Scheme. Out of this loan amount Rs.1,75,000/- was subsidy. Petitioner are to jointly operate savings bank account. Another SB account opened in the name of Amrita Sarkar for transaction. Rs.4 lac was kept in the Fix Deposit in the bank. Amrita Sarkar started repayment of the loan. But on 20.07.15 the cash credit account of Amrita Sarkar was closed on without notice. Samir Ghosh  one of the complainant issued cheque for Rs.80,000/- in favour of Sanjay Chanda against their SB Account. The cheque was deposited in the bank of Borada but the cheque was bounced for insufficient fund. Actual reason for bouncing the cheque not informed by the bank. The freezing of account by the bank was informed but it was without any notice. It caused harassment to the petitioner. Petitioner therefore claimed total Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation.

2.        O.P. bank Manager, United Bank of India G.B Hospital Branch appeared but filed no Written Statement denying the claim. It is stated in the statement on affidavit filed later that subsidy amount Rs.1,75,000/- was credited in the account of Amrita Sarkar on 20.07.12. subsequently on 20.07.15 subsidy account of Rs.1,75,000/- wrongly credited against the SB account of Amrita Sarkar. 2nd time entry of the subsidy was unintentional and was by mistake. Subsidy amount thus credited twice and the amount could not be recovered from the complainant. There is no deficiency of service by the O.P. at all. 

3.        On the basis of contention raised by the parties following points cropped up for determination;
        (I) Whether the bank account of the petitioner was closed and freezed without giving notice and without assigning reason?
        (II) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation for the deficiency of service by the bank manager?
        
4.        Petitioner produced the letter from General Manager, Bank Pass Book,  No Objection Certificate/Clearance Certificate, Cheque, Legal Notice etc. Petitioner also  produced the statement on affidavit of one witness.
    
5.        O.P. on the other hand produced the statement on affidavit of one witness, Sushil Chandra Deb. But he did not appear to face cross examination. No other documentary evidence produced by the O.Ps.

6.        So on the basis of evidence before us we shall now determine the above points.

        Findings and decision;
7.        From the letter of General Manager, District Industries Centre it is found that the loan project was sponsored by GB Hospital Branch. Admittedly loan was disbursed to the petitioner.  From the clearance certificate it is found that cash credit account No- 1507250000143 in the name of Amrita Sarkar was closed on 20.07.15. But cheque for Rs.80,000/- was issued by Samir Chanda in the name of Sanjay Chanda which was against the account No- 1507010118088. This cheque was bounced and it is reported by  the United Bank that for insufficient fund it was bounced. The statement of account not produced by the O.P. to show that actually the amount was not available in the account of the petitioner. We have gone through the SB account A/C Book and found that on 28.09.15 balance was more than Rs.1 lac.  Rs.20,000/- was withdrawn on that day. The account was in the name of Amrita Sarkar and Samir Ghosh. 
        
8.        The contention of the O.P. as disclosed in the statement on affidavit that for subsidy amount Rs.1,75,000/- was wrongly deposited in the account of the petitioner 2 times. If it is so then the bank could have taken step for realization of that amount from the petitioners. But without taking any such step the bank account was freezed and made non-operative without notice & assigning reasons. O.P. failed to give any single piece of evidence to support their contention. There is nothing before us to support that actually subsidy amount was deposited 2 times. There is nothing before us to support that actually insufficient fund was there. So the reason given by cheque bouncing insufficient fund  if not justified then the bank statement appears to be false. This is deficiency of service. Nationalized Bank  should not act in such a way.
        
9.        We therefore direct the O.P. bank Manager to take proper step for realization of the amount Rs.1,75,000/- if deposited at all 2 times.  But operation of the account should not stopped. It  should be revived at once & cheque should be honoured if amount is available. For this deficiency of service by the bank we direct the concerned UBI Bank authority to pay Rs.50,000/- to the petitioner as compensation. We also direct O.P. bank to pay Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost. In total Rs.60,000/- is to be paid. The bank account should be made operative without further delay. The petitioner is allowed to that extent. The payment is to be made within 2 months. If not paid it will carry interest @ 9% P.A.  

Announced.

 

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA    SRI U. DAS
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER 
DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.