S.K. SACHDEVA Vs. BALDEV SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners/Opposite Party No.1-Canara Bank and Opposite Party No.2-Mr.S. K. Sachdeva, being aggrieved by impugned order dated 31.5.2012 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh(for short, 'State Commission') in (First Appeal No. 07 of 2008)have filed separate revision petitions.

(2.) Brief facts are that Respondent No.1/Complainant (Baldev Singh) in order to make improvement of his agricultural land applied for a credit loan to the tune of Rs.5 lacs from Canara Bank as per their Scheme launched as 'Kissan Credit Card Scheme'. He completed all formalities and his land measuring 42 kanals and 9 marlas situated at village Bandala, was mortgaged vide mortgaged deed dated 11.01.2007. Thereafter, loan amount was to be released by Mr.S.K. Sachdeva, who made a demand of illegal gratification to the tune of 10% of the loan amount. However, complainant refused to pay the same. The bank therefore, did not release the amount, due to which complainant suffered mental tension and harassment and had to incur extra expenditure in incurring the loan from the other bank at a higher rate of interest. Complainant therefore, prayed for compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental tension and harassment, Rs.5,500/- as costs of litigation with interest @ 18% per annum till the amount of loan is released.

(3.) Canara Bank in its written statement has admitted about launching of 'Kissar Credit Card Scheme' and the fact, that complainant had approached it under the Scheme and applied for a crop loan. It has also been admitted, that land of complainant was mortgaged in favour of the bank, vide mortgage deed dated 11.1.2007. It is stated that before granting loan and disbursement of the loan amount, bank has to safeguard its interest. Complainant pressurised the bank to release the loan amount immediately without verification of Rapat with Halqa Patwari, which was not possible for the bank. Documents of the loan were still to be completed and Rapat verification was also pending. Mere mortgage of land in favour of the bank, does not entitle the complainant to get the loan without complying with other formalities. The bank is still ready to give the loan amount provided complainant return all the documents taken by him and complete the documentation etc. as per bank's requirement.