DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                            C.C.NO. 07 OF 2014.

Present:  Sri Rabindranath Mishra         - President

                 Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik   - Member.

                 Sri Chakadola Mallick               - Member.

Sujit Kumar Panigrahi, aged 28 years

Son of Sri Sibram Panigrahi,

At/PO: Chakapad, P: S: Chakapada.

Dist: kandhamal.                                                         ………………….  Complainant.

                                 Vrs.

1. Branch Manager

State Bank of India, Chakapad Branch,

At/PO/PS: Chakapad Dist: Kandhamal

2. Regional Manager,

S.B.I, Phulbani At: Main Road, Phulbani,

PO/PS: Phulbani, Dist: Kandhamal.                        ……………………Opp. Parties.

For the Complainant: Sri Bhagaban Mohanty and his associates.

For the Opp. Parties: Sri V.V. Ramadas and his associates.

Date of Order    : 31.01.2015

                                                                                                O R D E R

                                    The case of the Complainant in short is that he had availed a term loan of Rs. 3,80,000/- from S.B.I ,Chakapad branch and purchased a 207 TATA DI vehicle bearing No. OR-12-A/9313. The said loan was repayable by 66 equated monthly installments commencing from 31-07-2009. The rate of interest was 12.75% per annum as per condition mentioned in the letter of arrangement executed by the O.P No.1 with the Complainant. He has already paid Rs. 5, 47,000/- towards his loan account but O.P No.1 enhanced the rate of interest to 15.25% per annum without his knowledge and also without any intimation. The O.P No.1 had given two letters to him on 25-01-2014 which contradicts each other. One letter shows regarding the due as on 30-01-2014 which amounts Rs.1, 29,225/- with interest and another letter shows that the Bank has engaged the services of M/S S.R Das & Co, Cuttack to seize his vehicle. As the period of agreement was not over, the action of the O.P No.1 is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, he has filed this complaint for compensation of Rs. 20,000/- for his mental agony and for a direction to correct the rate of interest as per condition of the agreement.  

                                                                                                          -2-

                                     The case of the Opposite Parties as per their version is that the Complainant is not a Consumer and the Complaint is not maintainable as the issues involved in the complaint are relating to account for which the Consumer Forum has no jurisdiction . The Opposite Parties have admitted regarding the loan amount and rate of interest. It is stated by them that Bank has power to enhance the rate of interest as per clause 2(c) of the agreement. Their further case is that the Bank has notified in the Web-site, Notice boards of the Bank and some National leading and provincial leading Newspapers regarding the enhancement of interest at the relevant time . So, no personal information to the Complainant is required as they have not violating any condition of the agreement and there is no deficiency in service on their part. They prayed to dismiss the complaint without cost.

                                    We have heard the Complainant and learned counsels appearing for both the parties. We have gone through the Complaint petition, version of the opposite parties and the documents filed by the Complainant. Both parties were not interested to adduce any evidence in support of their case. It is admitted fact that the Complainant had availed a term loan of Rs. 3, 80,000/- from S.B.I Chakapad Branch and the rate of interest was 12.75% per annum. It is also admitted that no personal intimation was given to the complainant at the time of enhancement of the interest by the opposite parties. So the O.P No.1 has committed deficiency in service as the rate of interest was enhanced by them without any intimation to the Complainant as per principle of natural justice. No documents were filed by the O.P Bank in support of their stand .The Complainant has agreed to repay the loan amount in installments. He has filed a petition to this effect to allow him to clear up the loan amount through suitable installments. The Complainant has filed a written statement regarding the position of his loan amount provided by the O.P No.1 which shows Rs. 98.393/- was outstanding against him till 05-01-2015. Hence, the Complainant is directed to repay the loan amount outstanding against him till 31-01-2015 in 10 monthly installments starting from February 2015. The Opposite Parties are directed to give the loan statement to the Complainant accordingly and they are further directed not to charge any further interest or miscellaneous expenditure against the Complainant after 31-01-2015, the date of final order.

                                    The interim order passed on 14-02-2014 is vacated and the C.C is disposed of. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties.

                      MEMBER                                                  MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT