ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH Date of Institution : 14.07.2022 Date of Reserve : 13.03.2025 Date of Decision : 15.04.2025 Raman Sharma aged 56 years son of Sh.Balraj Sharma, residentof House No.17, Surya Enclave, New Punjab, Mata Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana-141003.

(Mobile No.78883-24238) (Email:gauravaggi78673@gmail.com)

…..Appellant/Complainant Versus

1. Vikas Sharma, Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Jandu Tower, Miller Ganj, Ludhiana-141003.

2. The Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, Regional Office, Near Waves Mall, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana-141001.

3. The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank, Regional Office, Near Waves Mall, Ferozepur Road, Ludhiana-141001.

….Respondents/Opposite parties First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 05.05.2022 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana. Quorum:-

Mr.Harinderpal Singh Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Ms.Simarjot Kaur, Member Present:-

For the appellant : Sh.Abhishek Sharma, Adv. for Sh.Vishal Gupta, Advocate For the respondents : Sh.Himanshu Sharma, Advocate HARINDERPAL SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant –Raman Sharma against the order dated 05.05.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana whereby the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant was dismissed.

It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is a doctor and his son Charanjeev Sharma is a qualified engineer and wished to study in Canada and accordingly he approached the opposite parties-Bank where opposite party No.1 was working as Manager and after verifying the documents, the opposite party No.1 assured to sanction the loan. The complainant applied for loan on 15.06.2021. Earlier also, the complainant availed the loan against loan account No.030400JB00000926 from the opposite parties- Bank but as the son of the complainant could not succeed in securing the VISA he immediately returned the loan, however, all the documents or security papers were already with the Bank, which was not taken back by the complainant. This time, the complainant made number of visits to the opposite parties-Bank but they put off the matter on one pretext or the other. Further, the opposite parties stated that the son of the complainant scored less than 60% marks in his bachelor degree and opposite parties No.1 denied the disbursement of loan. Thereafter, the opposite parties asked the complainant to meet AGM of the branch who interviewed his son who asked why he scored less marks with backlog for his bachelor degree and after his full satisfaction, AGM took an undertaking from son of the complainant regarding the reasons for securing less marks with back log and thereafter, AGM instructed opposite party No.1 for sanctioning of loan but still with the motive to delay the matter, opposite party No.1 asked the complainant to meet the officer in Zonal Office. On meeting, the complainant was informed that the CIBIL score of the complainant is very less and he should contact opposite party No.1 and also to complete CIBIL score. While approaching opposite party No.1, the complainant was informed that his CIBIL score was proper but due to mistake of opposite parties, the account of the complainant was declared as NPA thrice and they refused to give the details. This was because the opposite parties deducted certain charges from the account of the complainant without informing him and this happened thrice and all the times in audit, the account of the complainant was declared as NPA due to the mistake of the Bank, who never asked him to deposit the charges and deducted the same from the loan account. After convincing, the complainant again approached opposite party No.1 but they refused to disbur