SOMA CHEMICALS Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A married lady having failed to get financial assistance from bankers and receiving notice for exercise of statutory power from the financier has filed this complaint claiming compensation of Rs.8,96,932.60 paise from the opposite parties.

(2.) Opposite party Nos.1 and 4 are banking organisations and opposite party Nos.2 and 3 are the financing body.

(3.) Case of complainant in short is that she applied for financial assistance to establish a Small Scale Industry at Rourkela from opposite party No.3 through its Branch at Rourkela (opposite party No.2 ). Loan of Rs.4,11,000/- was sanctioned on 3.8.1984 subject to satisfaction of some terms and conditions one of which was to arrange loan for working capital. Thereafter, complainant approached the Syndicate Bank (opposite party No.1) for loan in respect of working capital and on 11.3.1985 Branch Manager of opposite party No.1 intimated that the bank would consider her proposal for sanction of working capital finance. All other terms having been satisfied, Orissa State Financial Corporation (opposite party No.3) disbursed loan to the tune of Rs.3,70,660/- after her unit was registered with District Industries Centre on 17.10.1985. Factory was ready for production in November, 1985. Since Syndicate Bank insisted on trial production prior to sanction of loan for working capital deputed its technical officer who on physical inspection was satisfied regarding trial production. However, on 17.1.1986 Syndicate Bank intimated complainant that it would not be possible to sanction any working capital facility as the bank was going through a period of credit restriction. Bank advised to contact any other bank and forwarded a copy to Branch of State Bank of India in Industrial Estate, Rourkela. However, inspite of approaches several times, State Bank of India did not sanction the loan and rejected the same on 4.4.1986 raising some points about her integrity. Complainant approached various authorities to render her assistance to get the loan. On 24.1.1987 Manager (credit) of District Industries Centre addressed a letter to Syndicate Bank to consider the loan application of complainant for working capital since there was no longer any credit squeeze. Complainant approached higher authorities of the Syndicate Bank. While complainant was making her attempts corporation first demanded interest and thereafter issued notice to seize the factory under Sec.29 of the State Finance Corporation Act.