Back
7OCT 20
CNO1
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL cOMMISSION
ORISSA, CUTTACK.
FIRST APPEAL No-577201
IN THE MATTER OF
An appeal under Section
15 of the Consumer
Protection Act-1986 and the rules made there under.
AND
IN THE MATTER OF:
1- BRANCH MANAGER,
Bank of India, Jeypur Branch,
At/P.o/ P.s- Jeypur, Dist-Koraput
2- ZONAL MANAGER, Bank of India,
Bhubaneswar Zone, Star House, Near Hottel Crown,
Jaydev Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
(Opp. Party No 1 and 2 before the District Forum respectively)
..APPELLANTS.
-Vrs-
Mr Sachidananda Mishra
S/o Kalisha Chandra Mishra
At. Power House colony, P O/P.S- Jeypur
Dist-Koraput
(Complainant before ihe District Forum)
RESPONDENT.
.
F.A.No.599/2011
293012 Heard the learned counsels of the parties.
The brief facts of the case of the complianant is that
the complainant availed a loan from the O.Ps for purchase of a
vehicle and in the month of March, 2011, he wanted to close his
loan account but the O.P No.l asked the complainant to come in
the 1" week of April due to burden of year ending works of the
bank. The complainant approached the O.P No.1 on 5.4.2011 and
the said O.P asked the complainant to deposit Rs.23,900/- towards
full and final closure of the loan dues, the complainant deposited
the said amount and waited till evening at the bank to get back his
documents. It is submitted by complainant that in the evening the
O.P No.l asked the complainant to pay a further sum of Rs.3000/-
towards
getting clearance from Zonal Offrice, thereafter the
documents deposited by the complainant shall be released to which
the complainant protested. It is further submitted that on 16.4.2011
the complainant with much difficultiy came to know that closure of
his loan account is pending due to non-payment of Rs.88/- and the
complainant deposited the said amount on that day but the O.P No.l
-2
not returned the documents to the complainant furnished by him. It
is also submitted that
on 25.4.2011 at about 12.00 noon the
complainant again approached the O.P No.1 to know about his loan
accounts but the O.P become furious
and started abusing the
complainant and as such the complaianant issued a notice to O.Ps
through his advocate. The O.P No.1 in reply to the said notice
stated that the complainant
may visit the bank to accept the
document. With these and other allegtions he filed this case praying
before the Forum below to direct the O.Ps to issue
No Due
Certificate and other documents for cancellation of hypothecation
before the R.T.O and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation to
the complainant.
On receipt of notice, the O.P No.l appeared and
filed written version denying the allegations made in the complaint
petition.
The Opposite parties filed counter admitting the
loan accounts of the complainant with them and deposit of
documents for availing the loan.
It is contended that the
complainant closed his loan account on 16.4.2011 and on the same
day the O.P requeted the complainant to obtain a copy of Form-35
to give notice of termination of hypothecation in the R.C. Book of
the vehicle and soon after receipt of said form on 23.4.2011 the 0.P
No.I signed on it and wrote a letter to the LIC for reassigrnmet of
LIC policy in the name of the complainant.
The O.P No.l also
requested the complainant to come on 25.4.2011
to receive
documents and duplicate key of the vehicle but instead of coming
to the bank he sent a legal notice to which the O.P replied on
29.4.2011 and inspite of reminders the complainant did not turn up
to the bank to receive his documents etc. It is also contended that
the O.Ps deputed one of their staff members to deliver the
documents and
duplicate key of the vehicle in person to the
complainant but he refused to receive those items.
On receipt of notice, the O.P No.l appeared and filed written
version denying the allegations made in the complaint petition.
After hearing the matter, the lemed
