This appeal is directed against of the final order dated 31/12/2021 in CC No. 47/2019 filed by respondent against the appellant Bangiya Gramin Bikash Bank and others U/S 12 of CP Act, 1986.

The fact of the case in nutshell is that the complainant has submitted project papers before the OP No. 2 B.D.O. for granting of loan to his project under the scheme S.V.S.K.P. of Govt. The loan was granted by OP No. 2 on the basis of project submitted to the tune of Rs. 249,000/-and subsidy of Rs,74,700/- on 17/03/2017 and the sanctioning order was sent to appellate bank for disbursement of loan on 19/12/2017. The OP No. 3 also by dint of that letter, sanctioned the subsidy amount Rs. 74,700/- in favor of the complainant on 28/11/2017 and transferred the subsidy fund to the bank account of OP No. 1.

The complainant is several occasions met with the bank officials for disbursement of loan amount after deduction of marginal amount and requested to transfer subsidy amount to his account.

But the bank did not discharge the obligation so this case.

The complaint was admitted in due course and notice was sent to all Ops who has contested the case by WV separately.

The OP No. 1 (appellate) in the pleading contended that on the basis of sanctioned letter of loan by OP No. 2 (B.D.O), the appellant requested the OP No. 2 by latter dated 17/03/2017 to release the subsidy amount in favour of bank and expressed the willingness on the part of bank to sanction bank loan in favour of the complainant.

But on the basis of circular of the H.O. of the bank dated 12/12/2017 vide circular number "THE BRANCHES WITH COMBINED LEVEL OF NPA+PNPA OF 50% AND ABOVE OF THE TOTAL LOANS & ADVANCES (LIST ENCLOSED), HEREIN AFTER CALLED THE SPECIFIED BRANCHES, ARE ADVICED TO RESTRICT SANCTIONING AND DISBURSING CRREDIT" and directed the concern branches for strict compliance of the same. That immediately the OP. No 1 hang a notice in the Branch premises on 15.12.2017 and communicated the matter to their customers through said notice. That due to aforesaid embargo the OP. No. 1 was unable to disburse any loan save and except issuance of KCCs and renewal of existing KCCs, existing SHGS, Loan against Term deposits, NSCs, KVPs, LIPS, LICS.

That due to the aforesaid embargo, the OP No.1 unable to process/disburse the bank loan amount to the complainant and complainant was well aware about such embargo of bank but cleverly suppressed the same and it is unfortunate that even after knowing all facts and circumstances, the complainant has filed this case with some concocted story to get wrongful gain. Thus, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the opposite party No.1 and the instant complaint petition is liable to be dismissed.

The OP No. 2 and 3 in their WV contended that on the basis of project submitted by the complainant under the scheme S.V.S.K.P. The project was approved and loan proposal was sent to OP No. 1 who on enquiry found visibility of project sent e sanction letter of loan to OP No. 2 and requested to release the subsidy amount in the account of the bank.  

Accordingly, the Op No.3 on the basis of recommendation letter of appellate bank, had transferred the subsidy fund to the A/C of appellate bank and r