State Bank of India VS Purshottam Lal Sahu

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SUNITA YADAV, MONIKA MALIK
State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Purshottam Lal Sahu – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: Shri Yash Vidyarthi, Learned Counsel
For the Respondent No.2: Shri Akash Sahu, Learned Counsel
For the Respondent No.1: None

ORDER

Sunita Yadav, President.—The appellant/Opposite Party No.1-State Bank of India has filed this appeal against the order dated 04.10.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Jabalpur-2 (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.349/2011whereby complaint filed by the complainant/respondent No.1 has been allowed.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that the complainant/respondent No.1 had obtained loan facility from the Opposite Party No.1/appellant-bank, however, due to some financial constraints could not make payment of some installments and thereafter Rs.10,000/- were deposited. He had also deposited the amount of some installments as one time deposit. It is alleged by the complainant that despite demand being made, the Opposite Party No.1-bank did not supply statement of account due to which the complainant could not deposit installment. It is further submitted that he deposited Rs.1,70,000/- in his loan account despite that the Opposite Party No2/respondent no.2 sent notice demanding payment of outstanding amount without giving any details. The complainant/respondent No.1 therefore alleging deficiency in service on part of opposite parties file

Click Here to Read the rest of this document