Present: Complainant in person.

We have heard the complainant at the time of preliminary hearing. As per complaint, it is pleaded that as per paper copy of page No.5, nothing has been done since 30.6.08 as directed by the Government to consider the loan under relief. It has been further pleaded that as per page No.6, alleged issued letter dated 23.7.04 and disputed to recover the loan of Rs.21,765/- without considering it come under relief years ago and disputed by harassing and chowking over the years willfully on his part unfair and restrictive trade practice that amounts to deficiency u/s 2(1)(n)(r) of the Act As per page No.7to8 alleged disputed to recover loan willfully without issuing Arbitrator order dated 29.5.09 passed in complainant's favour by court held by the alleged against Rs.250/- without leaving any written and outstanding instruction or permission to the petitioner to get the order on his own part. As per frequent letters written from Page No.9to16, alleged done nothing to settle the dispute nor increased limit account from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.2,50,000/- as per rules for socio-economic needs on reason in Rs.20,000/- land cannot be cultivated its a joke, nor passed any other loan upto 80% of Rs.1,00,00,000/- property for dairy, fishery and cold-store etc but chowked and duped every income over the years. As per page No.17to18 alleged to recover loan nor issued pending copy of the Arbitrator order under RTI Act, 2005. As page No.19to20 alleged by chowking over the years damaged formal crops more than of Rs.4,00,000/- at wheat price. A prayer has been made to settle the recovery dispute by getting issued pending Arbitrator order or complainant is to be allowed in written to get order; compensate damages of duped formal crops, costs of harassment and dispute suffered till date over the years; increase limit account as per complaint at RBI prescribed rate of interest from 2% to 4% p.a. Or any fit loan is to be passed and pass any order as this court may deem fit. As per page No.21 alleged is to be interrogated in the court to prove what are the reasons and why the alleged chowked and duped M.Com passed in business farmer's hard working life term period of 10 years from age 30to40 year whether farmer was (i) drunkard ever found by the alleged screaming for beer or wines to restrict the funds(ii) downtrodden or of low caste to restrict the funds (iii) BA pass romantic youth to misuse the funds. Parents were so or grand parents ever been so. As per page No.22to24 local police reported higher officials are to be contacted and as per FBI report alleged may be considered with closed fraudsters gathered to fraud moneys who as per ad proof attempted to auction complainant's land by binding this dispute and then by binding a forger court order to cost u/s 26 without getting filed court case papers without summoning OP and without prescribed procedure which reveals fraudsters to dupe in big greeds. Complaint is supported by an affidavit of complainant.

We have heard the complainant in person and have gone through the allegations made in the complaint as well as documents placed on the file. There is neither head nor tail in the pleadings. From the oral arguments it seems that complainant has a grudge against Arbitrator who had passed some order on 29.5.09 and the copy of the said order has not been supplied to complainant. Perusal of documents show that complainant has been approaching Bathinda Central Coop.Bank for his grievance. It is demanded to pass fit loan upto 80% of value of his property to increase his limit facility from Rs.20,000/- to any further amount. Documents also reveal that a publication has been issued by the competent authority, Assistant Collector, Grade-II-cum-Naib Tehsildar, Goniana Mandi to auction the land of complainant. Complainant has failed to disclose whether proceedings of auction have been completed or not. Even otherwise competent authority is pursing recovery proceedings against complainant, it will not fall within the purview of CPA. In case Arbitrator has not supplied the copy of order dated 29.5.09, complainant is at liberty to knock the doors of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies or Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies or any other higher authority. As such, complaint is not maintainable. Complaint is ordered to be returned to be presented before appropriate authority. Copies of documents and copy of complaint be retained. File be consigned to record.

Member Member President

16.3.15