Sultan Singh s/o Sh.Yusuf Ali, filed a consumer case on 10 Mar 2017 against Yamuna Nagar Distt.Primary coop. in the Yamunanagar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/343/2012 and the judgment uploaded on 14 Mar 2017.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR
Complaint No. 343 of 2012.
Date of institution: 10.04.2012
Date of decision: 10.03.2017
Sultan, aged about 50 years, son of Yusuf Ali, Resident of village Harnauli, PO Bherthal, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.
…Complainant.
Versus
The Yamuna Nagar, District Primary Co-op Agri. & Rural Development Bank Limited, Branch Office Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar through its Manager.
…Respondent.
BEFORE: SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.
SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.
Present: Shri Satish Sangwan, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Singhal, Advocate for OP.
ORDER (ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT)
1 The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 1986.
2. Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant was sanctioned a loan of Rs.80,000/- by respondent (hereinafter referred as OP Bank) for Agricultural purposes which was repayable in monthly installment. The complainant was always tried his level best to keep in the loan account regular in all respects but due to some financial crises, he failed to do so. Now the OP Bank has claiming huge amount from the complainant by levying interest on interest and other illegal charges, which the bank is not authorized to recover from the complainant. Upon which complainant approached the OP Bank and requested to supplied the account statement and also not to charge huge amount but the official of the OP Bank refused to do the same, which constitutes the deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP and lastly prayed for directed the OP Bank to issue correct and complete account statement and also to pay compensation as well as litigation expenses. Hence, this complaint.
3. In support of version, counsel for complainant tendered into evidence short affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CW/A and photocopy of notice dated 08.02.2012 issued by the OP Bank as Annexure C-1 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.
4. Upon notice, OP Bank appeared and filed its written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint, complaint has not illegally maintainable as the same has been filed just to harass the OP Bank and on merit it has been admitted that complainant took a loan of Rs.80,000/- from the OP Bank, which was repayable in installments, however, it has been specifically denied that the loan was taken for Agricultural purpose whereas the loan was taken by complainant for house loan and was repayable in a period of 5 years as per schedule given by OP Bank. Further it has been mentioned that complainant has not paid a single penny to the Bank towards his loan account and an amount of Rs.1,47,739/- is still outstanding towards the complainant upto dated 31.03.2012 i.e. Rs.80,000/- as principle amount and Rs.67739/- on account of interest calculated from dated 27.02.2004 (wrongly typed as 31.02.2004) to 31.03.2012 lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint as there was no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.
5. In support of his case, learned counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Shri Lovleen Dhammi, Branch Manager as RW/A and attested copy of account statement as Annexure R-1 and attested photocopy of account statement maintained in register as Annexure R-2, photocopy of resolution as Annexure R-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP Bank.
6. We have heard the counsels of both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file very carefully and minutely.
7. The only plea of the complainant is that official of the OP Bank had issued a notice (Annexure C-1) claiming huge amount from complainant by levying interest on interest and other illegal charges, which the bank has not authorized to recover from the complainant and further the OP Bank has not supplied the account statement to the complainant but this plea of the complainant is not tenable as from the account statement (Annexure R-1 and R-2) it is duly evident that complainant has not paid single penny to the OP Bank since taking the loan in the year 2004 and a huge amount of Rs.147739/- was due against the complainant till dated 31.03.2012. Complainant has not placed on file any single receipt vide which he ever deposited any amount with the OP Bank. On the other hand OP Bank has placed on file account statement showing the huge amount against the complainant as (Annexure R-1 and R-2) So we are of the considered view that present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the ulterior motive due to reason best known to the complainant.
8. Resultantly, in the circumstances noted above, the present complaint of the complainant has no merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. Copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Pronounced in open court: 10.03.2017.
(ASHOK KUMAR GARG)
PRESIDENT
DCDRF Yamuna Nagar
(S.C.SHARMA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.