SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 659

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
The Regional Manager State Bank of India & Anr. – Appellant
Versus
Sri Srikanta Ojha – Respondent
SC/19/A/845/2018



Petitioner Advocates:Ms. Deblina Lahiri. ,Respondent Advocate: Mr. Ratan Ghosh.

##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST BENGAL

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/19/A/845/2018

The Regional Manager, State Bank of India & Anr. .......Appellant(s)

PRESENT ADDRESS - P.O. & P.S. - Gosaba, Dist. South 24 Pgs., Pin -743 3

The Br. Manager, State Bank of India

PRESENT ADDRESS - P.O. & P.S. - Gosaba, Dist. South 24 Pgs., Pin -743 3

Versus

Sri Srikanta Ojha .......Respondent(s)

PRESENT ADDRESS - S/o Lt. Ananta Ojha, Vill., P.O. & P.S. - Gosaba, Dist.

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. AJEYA MATILAL , JUDICIAL MEMBER

HON'BLE MRS. SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA , MEMBER

Ms. Deblina Lahiri. (Advocate)

FOR THE APPELLANT:

Mr. Ratan Ghosh. (Advocate)

FOR THE RESPONDENT:

DATED: 30/01/2026

ORDER

Samiksha Bhattacharya, Member

The instant Appeal has been directed by the Appellant/The Regional Manager,

State Bank of India and another challenging the Order dated 04.09.2018 in

Complaint Case No. CC/52/2018 passed by Ld. DCDRC, South 24 Parganas.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Respondent/Complainant

‘ ’

(hereinafter referred to as Complainant) being a marginal and small farmer

took an agricultural loan amounting to Rs.10,000/- in the year 2001 from the

##PAGE2##

SBI, Gosaba Branch/Appellant No.2/OP No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as OP

No.2) and a loan Account being no. 01579082515 has been opened by the

Bank in the name of the Complainant with a Kisan Credit Card sum pass book.

Thereafter, Complainant deposited Rs.10,000/- on 21.01.2008 in the said

account to disburse the loan partly. In the year 2008 the Central Government

has pleased to declare a scheme namely Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt

Relief Scheme, 2008 whereby the loan advanced to marginal and small farmers

upto limit of Rs.1,00,000/- was waived. Accordingly, OP no. 2 prepared a list

of exempted borrowers and displayed the same on the notice board of OP No. 2

where the name of the Complainant was included. Therefore, the Complainant

demanded return of Rs.10,000/- paid by the Complainant to liquidate the

amount in compliance with the Central Government Scheme. So, he filed an

application under RTI before the OP No. 2 to furnish the information whether his

name was included in the list of exempted borrowers but no reply has been

sent by the OP No. 2. Hence, the Complainant has filed the petition of

complaint before the Ld. DCDRC concerned praying for direction upon the

‘ ’

Appellant No. 1/OP No. 1(hereinafter referred to as OP No.1) and OP No. 2 to

produce the list prepared under the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief

Scheme, 2008 and to return of Rs.10,000/- with 10% interest per diem along

with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.25,000/-.

Both the OPs appeared and filed their written version before the Ld. Trial

Commission. In their written version OPs admitted that on 13.08.2001 the loan

of Rs.10,000/- was disbursed in favour of the Complainant and on

20.01.2008 Complainant deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/-. O.Ps have denied

other material allegations inter alia stated that complainant is not entitled to

get the benefit of Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008. After

a lapse of seven years the complainant repaid his loan and after a lapse of 10

years complainant made a letter for the waiver scheme. Therefore, the case is

barred by limitation. After a gap of almost one decade the Complainant has

approached the OPs. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on their part.

Hence, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint in limini.

The Ld. DCDRC allowed the complaint. The order of the Ld. DCDRC is reproduced

as under:

That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the OPs

with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the OPs to the complainant.

The OPs are directed jointly and severally to return Rs. 10,000/- to the

complainant with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of his deposit i.e.

21.01.2008 till full realization thereof.

They are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.1 lac jointly and severally for unfair

trade practice adopted by them and out of that amount, Rs.30,0

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top