Judgment & Order
Brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant is a poor rural agriculturist and a job card holder under the Mahatma Gandhi Gramin National Employment Guarantee Act’ 2005 having bank account No.- 7320010001420 with the Opposite Party bank namely Assam Gramin Vikash Bank, Barjatrapur Branch and the said account was opened on 02/01/2010. That in the year 2012 though the complainant applied for Kishan Credit Card Loan ( in short KCC loan ) with the O.P. No.1 Barjatrapur Branch of the Assam Gramin Vikash bank but received no information either from the bank or from the concerned department regarding sanctioning of any loan by the O.P. and also no amount was credited in the aforesaid savings account of the complainant at any point of time. Subsequently on 11/08/2017 O.P. No.-1 informed the complainant that a loan of Rs.24,500/- ( Rs. Twenty four thousand five hundred ) only was disbursed on 19/02/2013 through loan account No.-7320250002646. But the O.P. did not provide her details information. Later on the O.Ps. closed the transaction in the savings account. According to the complainant, she came to know in the month of January’2017 that on 13/08/2013 an amount of Rs.24,500/- was sanctioned and the said amount was withdrawn. It has been alleged by the complainant that the said loan amount has been misappropriated by showing the sanctioning and disbursing of loan amount keeping the complainant in dark. By doing so the O.P. bank has caused disservice to the complainant. Under the circumstances the complainant has prayed for passing an award for payment of Rs. 65,000/- ( Rupees sixty five thousand ) only by the O.P. for losses suffered by the complainant and for cost of the proceeding etc.
The O.P. Nos. 1 & 2 have contested the case by filing written objection stating , interalia, that there is no cause of action for filing this case, that the complaint is not maintainable, that the complaint is bad for defect of parties, that the complaint is barred by the law of limitation etc. The O.Ps. have denied the allegations lavelled by the complainant. According to the O.ps. , the complainant applied for Kishan Credit Card loan and on 15/09/2012 an amount of Rs.24,500/- ( Rupees twenty four thousand five hundred ) only was sanctioned and on the same date the O.P. No.-1 handed over the loan sanction letter to the complainant who accepted the same. The complainant also executed various documents for availing the loan facility. She also withdrew the amount in cash by putting her signature on the relevant withdrawal slip. Further version of the O.Ps. is that a sum of Rs.32,509/- is outstanding in the said loan account of the complainant as on 02/11/2017 and the complainant failed to repay the same. The O.Ps. have also claimed that at no point of time an amount of Rs.700/- was deducted from the savings account of the complainant and the said S/B account is active till date. Also their further claim is that at no point of time the O.Ps. committed any disservice to the complainant. As such the case of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with cost to the answering O.P.
In support of the case, the complainant submitted her evidence on affidavit as PW-1 alongwith some exhibited documents. On the other hand, from the side of O.P. evidence on affidavit of Sri Bimal Sarma, Branch Manager of the O.P. bank was submitted alongwith some exhibited documents. After closing of the evidence both sides submitted written argument. Also heard oral argument put forward by the learned counsel. Perused the entire evidence on record.
The statement of PW-1 in her evidence is that she is a poor agriculturist and a job card holder under the MGNREGA scheme . She has got a savings bank account bearing No. 7320010001420 with the O.P.. No-1. In the year 2012 she applied for Kishan Credit Card loan ( in short KCC loan) but no information was received from the O.P.‘s bank and no amount was also deposited or credited in her S/B account. Subsequently, according to PW-1, in the month of January she went to the bank of O.P. No.-1 for updating her passbook but she was informed that her bank account had been closed. However on 11/08/2017 she was informed by the Branch Manager of the bank that an amount of Rs.24,500/- ( Rupees twenty four thousand five hundred ) only was disbursed as loan. It has been claimed by PW-1 that inspite of her persuation the O.Ps. provided her no information regarding details of her loan. As a result, she was compelled to issue notice to the bank through her engaged lawyer. PW-1 has alleged that keeping her in darkness misappropriation of Rs.24,500/- took place by showing the sanctioning and disbursing of said amount as loan and also on 15/12/2015 an amount of Rs.700/- was debited from her savings account keeping her in darkness. According to PW-1, thus the O.P. bank caused disservice to her by their aforesaid activities. PW-1 has exhibited Ext.-1 Job card under MGNREGA, Ext.-2 her S/B account alongwith Annexure -1 letter dated 09/03/2016, Annexure- 2 legal notice dated 30/09/2016 and Annexure-3 Acknowledgement Card.
So from the above discussion of the evidence of the complainant (PW-1) it reveals that she has got a S/B account with the O.P. bank and she applied for KCC loan and an amount of Rs. 24,500/- was sanctioned to her as loan and the said amount was also disbursed. However it has been alleged by PW-1 that keeping her in darkness loan was sanctioned and disbursed. But in his evidence DW Sri Bimal Sarma, the Branch Manager of O.P. No.-1 branch, has categorically stated that the Kishan Credit Card loan applied for by the complainant was allowed by the O.P. No.-1 and a loan amounting to Rs.24,500/- ( Rs. twenty four thousand five hundred ) only was sanctioned to the complainant on 15/09/2012. On the same date the o.P. No.-1 handed over the relevant loan sanction letter to the complainant who received the same by putting her endorsement. So, according to DW, the sanctioning of Rs.24,500/- as KCC loan to the complainant was within her knowledge since 15/09/2012 , on which date she also executed various documents for availing the said loan facility. Further version of the DW is that the said loan amount was credited to the account of the complainant and she herself withdrew the same in cash from the O.P. bank by putting her signature on the withdrawal form. Dw has denied the fact that an amount of Rs.700/- was deducted from the S/B account of the complainant as claimed by her. Also the Dw has specifically stated that the S/B account of the complainant was not closed and the said account is still active.
In support of his claim the DW has exhibited Ext.-A to Ext.-E documents. Ext.-A is the certified copy of the S/B account of complainant Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya , Ext.-B is the certified copy of the statement of KCC loan standing in the name of Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya. Ext.-C is the loan sanctioning letter , Ext.- D is the loan agreement executed by the complainant and Ext.-E is the demand promissory note executed by Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya. But in the written argument the complainant side has claimed that the signatures appearing in Exts.-C, D & E in the name of the complainant do not tally with the signatures of the complainant made in her complaint petition.
It may be mentioned that in the present case the O.Ps. filed counter claim petition and in favour of the said counter claim petition evidence on affidavit of witness Bimal Sarmah has been furnished alongwith some exhibited documents i.e., Ext.-1 to Ext.-7. Out of those documents Ext.-1 is the loan application of the complainant. Ext.-3 to Ext.-5 documents show that the same were executed by the complainant. According to the O.Ps. , the complainant withdrew the loan amount in cash by submitting withdrawal slip. They have also exhibited the said withdrawal slip as Ext.-7 which contains the signatures of Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya . But during the course of argument the complainant side has disputed the signatures appearing in the name of the complainant in the said withdrawal slip . Though the complainant side has taken the plea that the signatures appearing in the withdrawal slip as well as in Exts. C, D & E in the name of the complainant were not signed or written by the complainant herself but after comparing in bare eye those signatures appearing in the name of Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya with the signatures of the complainant available in her complaint petition we do not find major dissimilarity or difference. There is also no steps taken by the complainant side in the case for examination of the signatures in the withdrawal slip and in other loan documents appearing in the name of Angarun Nessa Barbhuiya by any handwriting expert. So from the documents exhibited by the O.P. side regarding loan matter there is hardly any scope to disbelieve the fact that the complainant executed the loan documents and withdrew the loan amount in cash from the O.P. bank through the withdrawal slip. There also appears no disservice caused by the O.P. towards the complainant.
Again though in the present case the O.Ps. have submitted a counter claim petition with the prayer to direct the complainant to repay the loan amount but the complainant side has objected the said counter claim petition stating that the same is not maintainable. Here in the present case the O.Ps. are not the consumer. As such their prayer cannot be considered and they cannot get any relief in the case.
From the above discussions of the evidence on record it has come out that the complainant has failed to establish her claims. Accordingly, the case stands dismissed. No costs.
Given under hand and seal of this commission on this 29th day of December/2021.
