LAMPUS Vs. RESHU BAHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will govern disposal of Appeal No. 534/2007 as well as Appeal No. 536/2007, which have been filed respectively by O.Ps. and the Complainant of Complaint Case No. 06/2003 decided by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kanker (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) vide order dated 22.9.2007 directing the O.Ps. to pay Rs. 57,000 along with interest @ 9% p.a. w.e.f. 28.4.2003 and also to pay Rs. 2,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 1,000 for cost of litigation. For convenience hereinafter, the appellants of Appeal No. 534/2007 will be referred as "O.Ps." and the appellant of Appeal No. 536/2007 will be referred as "Complainant".

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the complainant is a farmer within jurisdiction of OP Bank and was obtaining loan from the year 2002, from the OPs for agriculture operations in the form of goods as well as cash. A Kisan Credit Card was issued, in favour of the complainant by OP Bank on 16.2.2002, for the purpose of providing loan in the years 2001 -02, 2002 -03 and 2003 -04. In the first year, loan of Rs. 75,000 was provided out of which Rs. 50,000, were for purchase of seeds and fertilizer, etc., and Rs. 25,000 were in cash. The complainant deposited Rs. 53,000 out of that loan and applied for grant of loan of Rs. 75,000 for the next crop. That prayer was not allowed by the OP and the cheque issued by the complainant for purchase of fertilizer, etc., was dishonoured causing loss to the complainant. When the O.Ps. have totally refused to provide any loan facility, then a consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was filed alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps.

(3.) IN reply, the O.Ps. had averred that overdue amount of loan was there against the complainant and he was a defaulter. As per policy of the Bank, defaulters were not entitled for getting a fresh loan and, therefore, the cheque was dishonoured and in doing so, no deficiency in service was committed by the O.Ps.