PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SAMBALPUR

Consumer Complaint No.-214/2023

Present-Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, President,

  Sri. SadanandaTripathy, Member,

1. Dibya Kishor Meher, S/O-Siba Narayan Meher,
2. Siba Narayan Maher, S/o- Late Parikhita Meher,

Both are R/O- Bikampur, PO-Parmanpur,

Ps-Sason, PS/Dist-Sambalpur-768200, Odisha.         ………........Complainant

-Vrs.-

1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, ADB Branch

At-Near Jewellery World, VSS Marg, Sambalpur Town

PO-Head, Ps-Town, Dist-Sambalpur-768001.

2. The Chief Manager (Credit & NPA), State Bank of India,

R.B.O.-III, Sambalpur, Odisha-768001.

3. The D.G.M. State Bank of India, Zonal Office,

At-Ainthapali, Sambalpur, Odisha-768004.

4. The General Manager-I, State Bank of India,

6^th floor, Local Head Office-III/1, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Bhubaneswar, Khorda, Odisha-751001.

5. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India,

6^th floor, Local Head Office-III/1, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Bhubaneswar, Khorda, Odisha-751001.             .....................Opp.Parties

Counsels:-

1. For the Complainant     :- Sri. S.Dash & Associates
2. For the O.Ps.                   :- Sri. A.K. Das & Associates

Date of Filing:28.11.2023,  Date of Hearing :10.09.2024,  Date of Judgement :04.11.2024

Presented by Dr. Ramakanta Satapathy, PRESIDENT

1. The Complainants filed the Complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps and unfair trade practice. The Complainants have availed a tractor loan and trailor from the O.P.No.1 for the vehicle No. OR-15S 3127 and trailor OR-15S-3128 and loan amount is Rs. 7,50,000/-. For default of one installment the O.P.No.1 threatened the Complainants and filed Civil Suit No. 59/2016 before commercial Court, Sambalpur. In September 2023 the O.Ps displayed photo of Complainant in notice board and thereafter came to know about impersonation of seizure report during seizure of the vehicle. Being aggrieved complaint has been filed.
2. The O.Ps in reply submitted that the dispute is not a Consumer dispute and triable by Criminal/Civil Court. The allegations are baseless and the Claim is vexatious. This Commission has no territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction. Civil Suit No. 59/2016 is pending for recovery of the loan outstanding. For the same cause of action two cases can not run. In case of non-payment the lender has power to seize the loan vehicle and can sale through auction sale to recover the loan amount. In case the borrower fails to repay the loan for 180 days, the banks/ blender has right to take remedy under the law against the borrower. Under SARFAESI Act and rules framed there under the lender can seize and repossess the secured asset.

There is no deficiency on the part of O.Ps and unfair trade practice as alleged. The complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

3. The Complainants filed the following documents:

1. R.T.I. information Regd. No. SBI/BR/R/E/23/00153
2. RTI information dated 22.11.2023.
3. Inventory dated 11.07.2015
4. Registration certificate of vehicle No. OR-15S-3127 and OR 15S-3128.
5. Photograph of Dibya Kishore Meher on the notice board of the O.P.No.1.
6. Demand notice dated 25.08.2021.
7. Account statement in A/C NO. 32145469414 from 17.01.2012 to 29.06.2017 and 02.07.2021 to 22.11.2023.
8. OTS proposal offer.

The O.Ps have not filed any documents.

4. Perused the pleadings of the parties and documents filed. The following issues are framed:

ISSUES

1. Whether the dispute is not a consumer dispute and the Complainants are not consumer of the O.Ps?
2. Whether this dispute is triable by criminal/Civil Court and pendency of Civil Suit No. 59/2016 bars this Commission to try the Complaint?
3. Whether this Commission has no territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to make the trial?
4. Are the O.Ps deficient in their service and acts of O.Ps are unfair trade practice?
5. What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

Issue No.1 Whether the dispute is not a consumer dispute and the Complainants are not consumer of the O.Ps?

It is the admitted case of both the parties that against term loan A/C No. 321454694141 for RS. 7,50,000/- the Complainant mortaged the tractor bearing NO. OR 15S-3127 and trailor bearing No. OR 15S-3128. The Complainants availed the loan on 20.01.2012. The dispute is regarding illegal seizure of vehicle and auction sale as alleged by the Complainants. As the Complainants are customers of the O.Ps the dispute is a consumer dispute. Accordingly, the issue is answered.

Issue No. 2 Whether this dispute is triable by criminal/Civil Court and pendency of Civil Suit No. 59/2016 bars this Commission to try the Complaint?

It is the admission of both the parties that a Civil Suit bearing No. 59/2016 is pending before the Commercial Court, Sambalpur. The O.Ps submitted that for non-payment of the outstanding dues Civil Suit has been filed. The O.Ps have every right to recover the outstanding dues from the borrowers to safeguard the interest of the Bank. Further the O.Ps have every right to recover under the law either by filing Civil Suit or initiate proceeding under the SARFAESI Act by seizing the secured asset and making auction sale. The O.Ps submitted that for the same cause of action Civil Suit is pending and this case is not maintainable.

The Complainant submitted that cause of actions are different. In a consumer case deficiency in service is to be examined. This Commission has no jurisdiction to interfere on the outstanding balance and to payment be made by Complainant to the O.Ps. Secondly, allegation of the Complainant is that forged/manipulated signatures of the Complainant has been made. This aspect is also purely coming within the jurisdiction of the criminal Court. The only point of consideration is deficiency in service of the O.Ps.

The O.Ps not explained the following aspects not submitted any documents:

1. For non-payment of instalments demand notices served to the Complainant has not been filed.
2. The O.Ps not filed the seizure list of the vehicle and procedures followed for seizure of vehicle with trailor.
3. The O.Ps not submitted documents relating to auction of the vehicle and wide publication made along with notices to borrower and guarantor.
4. The O.Ps not filed the bid sheet of the auction sale and also not disclosed the highest bidder with bid amount.
5. Post-auction notice has not been served to the Complainant.
6. Auction sale amount on which date adjusted in the loan account and follow up action not narrated by the O.Ps.

From the supra discussion it is clear that the O.Ps not followed due procedures for preparation of inventory and auction sale which amounts to deficiency in service. The Civil Court has no jurisdiction to interfere on the point of deficiency in service, accordingly we are not inclined to go for the recovery part of the outstanding dues.

The issue is answered accordingly.

Issue No. 3 Whether this Commission has no territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to make the trial?

The Complainants are resident of village Bikampur under Sambalpur district. The O.Ps are also having office in Sambalpur town. Both the parties are within the territorial jurisdiction of this Commission. Regarding pecuniary jurisdiction the dispute is regarding the finance of the vehicle amounting to Rs. 7,50,000/- and not on the amount claimed. Accordingly, as the consideration is less than Rs. 50.00 lakhs this Commission has jurisdiction. The issue is answered accordingly.

Issue No. 4 Are the O.Ps deficient in their service and acts of O.Ps are unfair trade practice?

As discussed supra the O.Ps are deficient in their service. The O.Ps not followed due procedure for seizure of the vehicle, auction sale and non-disclosure of the acts amounts deficiency in service.

The issue is answered against the O.Ps.

Issue No.5 What relief the Complainant is entitled to get?

          As discussed Supra the Complainants entitled for the relief sought for partly.

          Accordingly, following order is passed:

ORDER

The complaint is allowed partly against the O.Ps. The O.Ps are directed to give detail accounts of the vehicle sold on auction sale. For deficiency in service the O.Ps are to pay compensation of Rs. 10.00 lakhs for the suffering and unfair trade practice. Further the O.Ps are to pay litigation expenses of Rs. 20,000/- to the Complainant. In case of non-compliance within one month of the order, the O.Ps are to pay interest @ 12% P.A. w.e.f date of filing complaint till actual payment.

            Order pronounced in the open court on 4^th day of Nov. 2024.

Supply free copies to the parties.