National Consumer Disputes Redressal
Punjab National Bank vs Lt. Col. D.R. Aggarwal on 3 July, 2006
Equivalent citations: IV(2006)CPJ165(NC)
ORDER
S.N. Kapoor, J. (Presiding Member)
1. This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Appeal No. A-15/2003 decided on 9.12.2005 allowing the appeal of the complainant and directing the appellant Punjab National Bank to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000 for the non-observance of the terms of the agreement and causing financial loss, mental agony and harassment. The complainant had to pay about Rs. 64,000 for the loan amount of Rs. 32,525 with cost of Rs. 2,000. This amount is in addition to Rs. 2.5 lakh received from respondent No. 2 M/s. D.R. Sondhi Farms.
2. There was tripartite agreement between the appellant, respondent No. 1 Bank and respondent No. 2 M/s. D.R. Sondhi Farms who owned about 200-300 acres of farm land in village Bisola, Mawana Road, Meerut and intended to set-up a holiday tourist resort on the farm land. The complainant/respondent before us, raised two loans from the New Bank of India (which has since been merged into Punjab National Bank), one loan for Rs. 24,300 for one acre on 10.11.1986 and another for Rs. 18,225 for 3/4th acre on 15.5.1987. This tripartite agreement is slightly unusual so far as the banking business is concerned, but the terms of the agreement are not in dispute. The Bank has undertaken an obligation of not only granting loan for purchasing land for the purpose of plantation and maintenance of 4,500 Eucalyptus tree per acre in 6 years, it has also undertaken that the entire plantation of trees would stand hypothecated with the second party, New India of Bank, i.e., predecessor-in-interest of Punjab National Bank. The plants would be got insured by the 1st party at their own cost. This tripartite agreement in Clauses 9,10, 11 and 12 further provided as under:
9. That it has been agreed between the party No. 1 and party No. 2 that trees shall be planted and maintained on the said plot of land and 50% of the trees shall be cut at the end of 31/2 years and rest of the trees shall be harvested at the end of the 6th year and proceeds thereof shall be paid to the New Bank of India.
10. The third party at the end of 6th year period shall inform to the party of 2nd part and 1st party that the trees are ready to cut off and dispose of in the market. That on receiving the said intimation from 3rd party, the 1st party shall authorise its agents, authorised persons to get the trees sold in the open market under their strict provisions In case of any shortfall the part of the 1st part pay shall pay the same to the 2nd part from its own sources including disposig of the mortgaged land.
11. That party No. 3 the confirming party will plant and maintain the trees for a period fo 6 years, as per agreement between party No. 1 and party No. 3 and during this period of 6 years, the party No. 3 will hold the trees on behalf of New Bank of India, Party No. 2 and during this period or after a period of 6 years, the party No. 3 shall not hand over the possession of the trees to any one else except New Bank of India or to any authorised representative of party No. 2.
12. That after the period of 6 years, party No. 3 shall inform party No. 2 in writing to take possession of the trees and shall handover the same in the manner as provided in para 10 above.
14. That the party No. 2, Bank shall have the rights to carry out inspection through its representative regarding the progress made of the plantation at any time.
3. Party Nos. 1 and 3, that is, neither the complainantnor M/s. D.R. Sondhi Farms would cause any hindrance for taking into possession of the trees in terms of Clause 10. The complainant would authorize a person to cut the trees as also in the market under the supervision of officers, agents, etc. authorized by the New Bank of India. It is thus evident by the fact that the trees were to be inspected and ultimately sold only by the New Bank of India, the predecessor-in-interest of Punjab National Bank.
4. There is no dispute that erstwhile New Bank of India has been amalgamated and merged with Punjab National Bank by virtue of gazette notification of 4th Sept., 1993, and all the rights and obligation of New Bank of India has been taken over by the Punjab National Bank.
5. In view of the tripartite agreement it could not be said that the Bank was under no obligation to inspect and to ensure that the sale proceeds are recovered to clear the loan for in terms of the tripartite agreement that amount was to be adjusted towards the account of the complainant. Since on account of failure of the Bank to ensure the sale of the Eucalyptus trees in terms of Clauses 11 and 12 and failure to discharge other obligation under other clauses of the agreement about the adjustment of the amount in accounts books, loss suffered by the complainant/respondent, due to breach of obligation arising out of the agreement, are required to be compensated. Since the complainant had to pay Rs. 64,000 for the loan of Rs. 32,525 the State Commission was justified in awarding compensation of Rs. 25,000 against the Bank along with the cost of Rs. 2,000.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any force in the revision petition and it is dismissed accordingly.