State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Rajwant Kaur vs The District Manager, The Tarn Taran ... on 7 November, 2012
2nd Bench
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB
SECTOR 37-A, DAKSHIN MARG, CHANDIGARH.
First Appeal No.1415 of 2011.
Date of Institution: 19.09.2011.
Date of Decision: 07.11.2012.
Rajwant Kaur W/o Sh. Amarjit Singh, Resident of Village Chhina Bidhi Chand,
District Tarn Taran.
.....Appellant.
Versus
1. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank
Limited, District Tarn Taran.
2. The Branch Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank
Limited, Branch Office Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran.
...Respondents.
First Appeal against the order dated
16.08.2011 of the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, Tarn Taran.
Before:-
Shri Inderjit Kaushik, Presiding Member.
Shri Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member.
...................................
Present:- Sh. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate, counsel for the appellant.
None for respondent no.1.
Respondent No.2 Exparte.
----------------------------------------
INDERJIT KAUSHIK, PRESIDING MEMBER:-
This order shall dispose of the following seven (7) appeals, as the similar question of facts and law are involved in all the appeals and the appeals are directed against the similar orders dated 16.08.2011 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Tarn Taran (in short "the District Forum"):-
Sr. No. Appeal No. Parties Name 1. F.A. No.1415 of 2011 Rajwant Kaur Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 2 2. F.A. No.1416 of 2011 Amarjit Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. 3. F.A. No.1417 of 2011 Amar Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. 4. F.A. No.1418 of 2011 Harjinder Kaur Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. 5. F.A. No.1419 of 2011 Mrs. Desso Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. 6. F.A. No.1420 of 2011 Ninder Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr. 7. F.A. No.1421 of 2011 Bachittar Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
The facts are taken from F.A. No.1415 of 2011 and the parties would be referred by their status in this appeal.
2. Facts in brief are that the appellant/complainant filed a complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, "the Act") against the respondents, on the grounds that she got sanctioned a Consumer Durable (CD) loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 10.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Amarjit Singh and Resham Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, respondent no.2. The appellant submitted all the documents and complied with all the formalities as required for sanction of the said CD loan with branch Rajatal and opened account no.176 in her name.
3. During the course of dealing of sanctioning the said loan, respondent no.1 through respondent no.2 agreed to pay Rs.30,000/-, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 3 Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Bee Keeper S. Baljit Singh Gandiwind of Rs.40,000/- by giving the bogus particulars of 20 boxes of honey was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing that the said Bee Keeper and the officials of the respondents were hand in gloves with each other. In fact, the appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor signed the bill. The respondents by preparing the said bogus bill committed unfair trade practice with malafide motive to recover the said amount illegally. The respondents have no right to recover the said amount and a legal notice U/s 79 of the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 was served upon the respondents, to which a false reply was filed by the respondents. The respondents are guilty of deficiency in service and the appellants suffered lot of mental tension, agony and harassment and is entitled to compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
4. In the written reply filed on behalf of the respondents, preliminary objections were taken that the present complaint is not maintainable against the Society, as the Consumer Protection Act is not applicable. The appellant has no cause of action to file the complaint, as she admits of having taken the loan and execution of documents. The appellant has suppressed material facts and has levelled allegations of fraud and forgery against the bank officials and the Consumer Forum is not the proper Forum to adjudicate the complaint and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
5. On merits, it was admitted that the appellant got sanctioned a CD loan of Rs.30,000/- on 10.05.2006 and completed all the formalities. It was further submitted that a loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned to the appellant for the business of Bee Keeping and purchase of Bee and Bee Boxes. The loan was to be disbursed by the concerned branch of the bank First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 4 and the District Manager i.e. respondent no.1 is not involved in the disbursement of the loan. The notice for the recovery was sent to the appellant to remind her for making the payment of loan in time. At the time of taking the loan, the appellant submitted a bill of Bee Keeper Baljit Singh Gandiwind, for purchasing 20 boxes of Honey amounting to Rs.40,000/- and as per the scheme of the loan, the bank was to make third party payment for a loan of Rs.30,000/- and the bank had accordingly made the payment to the said concern as per the advice of the appellant. Rs.10,000/- was paid by the appellant of her own. It was an agreement between the appellant and the said firm for purchase/supply of goods by raising the loan. The loan was not repaid and the notice was sent. Other allegations of the complaint were denied and it was prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
6. Parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions by way of affidavits and documents.
7. After going through the documents and material placed on file and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned District Forum observed that as per the scheme of the loan, the bank was to make third party payment of Rs.30,000/-. The appellant submitted a bill of Baljit Singh, Bee Keeper amounting to Rs.40,000/- for purchase of 20 Bee Boxes and Bee at the time taking the loan and the bank was to make third party payment for a loan of Rs.30,000/- and the bank accordingly made the payment to the said concern. The said bill is also thumb marked by the appellant and there is no deficiency in service, and dismissed the complaint.
8. Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.08.2011, the appellant has come up in appeal.
9. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, perused the record of the learned District Forum and have perused the written arguments filed on behalf of the appellant.
10. Neither counsel for respondent no.1 nor anybody else on its behalf appeared at the time of arguments.
First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 5
11. Respondent no.2 has not contested the appeal and was proceeded against exparte.
12. The appellant has filed her own affidavit as Ex.CW-1/A and affidavit of Amarjit Singh Ex.CW-2/A, copy of legal notice Ex.C-1, copy of voter cards issued by the Election Commission of India Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3, death certificate of Sh. Resham Singh Ex.C-4.
13. The respondents have filed the affidavit of Darbara Singh, Branch Manager as Ex.RW-1/A. The application Ex.R-1 filed by the appellant for M.T.N.A. Loan under Salary Earners Scheme, for an amount of Rs.30,000/- which is duly thumb marked by her and verified by the Branch Manager. Along with the application, there is Branch Manager's report, authority letter given by the appellant, copy of Promissory Note Ex.R-2 as per which the appellant agreed to pay on demand Rs.30,000/- along with interest @ 12% p.a.; Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3 duly thumb marked by the appellant; Authority Letter Ex.R-4, authorizing the bank to debit the amount of installments; Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5 which is again duly thumb marked by the appellant as well as the witnesses and the Branch Manager; Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6 and affidavit Ex.R-7 of the appellant. Ex.R-8 is the bill for the purchase of Bee Boxes and Bee for Rs.40,000/-. Ex.R-9 is the reply to the legal notice.
14. The appellant has thumb-marked these documents and it stands fully proved that the appellant took a loan of Rs.30,000/- from the respondents and this loan was adjusted for payment to the third party. The appellant has not placed on file any document to prove that she took a loan of Rs.11,000/- only. The overwhelming documentary evidence is sufficient to prove and establish that the appellant took a loan of Rs.30,000/- from the respondents and has not repaid any amount. The appellant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. The order of the District Forum is well reasoned and is based on the above mentioned documents and there is no ground to interfere with the same. First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 6
15. Sequel to the above discussion, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
16. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1416 of 2011:-
17. Similarly, in F.A. No.1416 of 2011 (Amarjit Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned N.F.S. loan of Rs.25,000/- dated 08.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Sandeep Singh and Resham Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, respondent no.2. Account no.119 was opened in his name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.25,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 04.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.25,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Bee Keeper S. Baljit Singh Gandiwind of Rs.25,000/- by giving the bogus particulars of poultry goods prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said Bee Keeper with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor signed the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 7
18. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011.
19. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
20. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Sanction of Composite/Integrated Loan Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Deed Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, Loan agreement Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Baljit Singh, proprietor of Poultry Farm Gandiwind Ex.R-8, which is signed by the appellant. A Loan of Rs.25,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.25,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
21. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1416 of 2011 (Amarjit Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
22. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1417 of 2011:-
23. Similarly, in F.A. No.1417 of 2011 (Amar Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned C.D. loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 10.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Amarjit Singh and Sandeep Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 8 respondent no.2. Account no.161 was opened in his name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Sandhu Karyana Store of Rs.40,000/- dated 10.05.2006 by giving the bogus particulars of karyana goods was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said karyana store with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor signed the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
24. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011.
25. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
26. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Authority Letter Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, affidavit of the appellant Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Baljit Singh, proprietor of Poultry Farm Gandiwind Ex.R-8, which is thumb marked by the appellant. Loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.30,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
27. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1417 of 2011 First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 9 (Amar Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
28. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1418 of 2011:-
29. Similarly, in F.A. No.1418 of 2011 (Harjinder Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned C.D. loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 18.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Amarjit Singh and Bachittar Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, respondent no.2. Account no.174 was opened in her name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Baba Budha Ji Furniture & Mechanical Works of Rs.40,000/- dated 10.05.2006 by giving the bogus particulars of furniture goods was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said concern with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor thumb marked the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 10
30. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011.
31. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
32. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Authority Letter Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, affidavit of the appellant Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Sukhram Singh, Proprietor of Baba Budha Ji Furniture & Mechanical Works Ex.R-8, which is thumb marked by the appellant. Loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.30,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
33. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1418 of 2011 (Harjinder Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
34. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1419 of 2011:-
35. Similarly, in F.A. No.1419 of 2011 (Mrs. Desso Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned a CD loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 18.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Amarjit Singh and Bachittar Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 11 respondent no.2. Account no.173 was opened in his name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Bee Keeper Baljit Singh, of Rs.40,000/- by giving the bogus particulars of 20 boxes of honey was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said Baljit Singh with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor thumb marked the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
36. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011.
37. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
38. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Authority Letter Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, affidavit of the appellant Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Baljit Singh, proprietor of Poultry Farm Gandiwind Ex.R-8, which is thumb marked by the appellant. Loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.30,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
39. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1419 of 2011 (Mrs. First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 12 Desso Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
40. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1420 of 2011:-
41. Similarly, in F.A. No.1420 of 2011 (Ninder Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned a CD loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 31.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Harpal Singh and Kawaljeet Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, respondent no.2. Account no.206 was opened in his name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Bee Keeper Baljit Singh of Rs.40,000/- by giving the bogus particulars of 20 boxes of honey was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said Baljit Singh with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor signed the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
42. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011. First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 13
43. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
44. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Authority Letter Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, affidavit of the appellant Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Bee Keeper Baljit Singh, Ex.R-8, which is signed by the appellant. Loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.30,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
45. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1420 of 2011 (Ninder Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
46. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days. First Appeal No.1421 of 2011:-
47. Similarly, in F.A. No.1421 of 2011 (Bachittar Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), the appellant got sanctioned a CD loan of Rs.30,000/- dated 18.05.2006 with two guarantees namely Amarjit Singh and Resham Singh, as per the scheme/ offer of The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Tarn Tarn through its branch, respondent no.2. Account no.172 was opened in his name, but the respondents neither paid the entire loan amount as agreed, nor the appellant First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 14 purchased any goods from any shop. Respondent no.2 paid a sum of Rs.11,000/- to the appellant in cash out of the total amount of Rs.30,000/-. Respondent no.2 sent a notice dated 10.06.2009, demanding an illegal and arbitrary amount of Rs.30,000/- along with interest and on the back of the said notice, there is an endorsement which is self created, undated bill of Baba Budha Ji Furniture & Mechanical Works of Rs.40,000/- by giving the bogus particulars of furniture goods was prepared on the blank and white paper under the bogus seal and stamp, showing the connivance of the said concern with the officials of the respondents. The appellant never purchased such goods nor there is any occasion for the same, nor signed the bill. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/-.
48. The respondents contested the complaint by filing the written reply on the similar lines of their reply filed in F.A. No.1415 of 2011.
49. The District Forum vide order dated 16.08.2011, on the similar findings as mentioned above, dismissed the complaint.
50. The respondents have proved on record copy of application for loan Ex.R-1, Promissory Note Ex.R-2, Letter of Waiver Ex.R-3, Authority Letter Ex.R-4, Hypothecation Agreement Ex.R-5, Letter of Lien and Set Off Ex.R-6, affidavit of the appellant Ex.R-7 and copy of bill issued by Sukhram Singh, Proprietor of Baba Budha Ji Furniture & Mechanical Works Ex.R-8, which is signed by the appellant. Loan of Rs.30,000/- was sanctioned in favour of the appellant. As per the scheme of loan, the bank was to make third party payment for the loan of Rs.30,000/-, which the bank accordingly made to the said concern as per advice of the appellant.
51. In view of above discussion as well as in view of the reasons and discussion held in F.A. No.1415 of 2011 (Rajwant Kaur Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.), F.A. No.1421 of 2011 (Bachittar Singh Vs The Tarn Taran Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & First Appeal No.1415 of 2011 15 Anr.) is dismissed and the impugned order under appeal dated 16.08.2011 passed by the District Forum is affirmed and upheld. No order as to costs.
52. The appellant had deposited an amount of Rs.5,000/- with this Commission vide receipt dated 10.01.2012 in compliance of the order dated December 14, 2011 passed by this Commission. This amount with interest accrued thereon, if any, be remitted by the registry to the appellant by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days.
53. The arguments in all the appeals were heard on 02.11.2012 and the orders were reserved. Now the orders be communicated to the parties.
54. The appeals could not be decided within the stipulated timeframe due to heavy pendency of court cases.
55. Copy of the order be placed in the following cases:-
2. F.A. No.1416 of 2011 Amarjit Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
3. F.A. No.1417 of 2011 Amar Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
4. F.A. No.1418 of 2011 Harjinder Kaur Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
5. F.A. No.1419 of 2011 Mrs. Desso Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
6. F.A. No.1420 of 2011 Ninder Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
7. F.A. No.1421 of 2011 Bachittar Singh Vs. The District Manager, The Tarn Taran Central Cooperative Bank Limited & Anr.
(Inderjit Kaushik) Presiding Member (Baldev Singh Sekhon) Member November 07, 2012.
(Gurmeet S)