L. Ruckmani vs Indian Bank on 30 September, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

L. Ruckmani vs Indian Bank on 30 September, 2021

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 05.04.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through the RTI application dated 27.11.2018and first appeal dated 01.03.2019:-

 The appellant's husband Late R. Shantha Kumar had availed agricultural loan for Mushroom Project from Indian Bank, Coonoor Branch, Nilgiris District. The details of the Agricultural Medium Term Loan availed are detailed below:

Page 1 of 4

1. Loan Number : ******7682

2. Loan amount : 40,00,000/-

3. Nature of loan : Agricultural Term Loan

4. Name of the Bank : Indian Bank, Coonoor Branch, The Nilgiris, Tamil Nadu In this regard, it is requested to furnish the following particulars under the RTI Act 2005.

     (i)       The insurance coverage for the said loan.
     (ii)      If yes, the nature of the insurance and copy of the same.
     (iii)     Details of payment of premium if any.
     (iv)      Whether the insurance policy is in force.
     (v)       If no, the reasons for the lapse of the insurance policy.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 27.11.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Indian Bank, Coimbatore, seeking aforesaid information.

The CPIO vide letter dated 16.02.2019 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 01.03.2019. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 21.03.2019 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 05.04.2019 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 05.04.2019 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 16.02.2019 that information sought was not traceable with their Coonoor Branch record. The FAA vide order dated 21.03.2019 informed that there was no insurance coverage for the said loan.

Page 2 of 4

5. The appellant represented by Shri N Gopinath and on behalf of the respondent Shri Sandeep Kumar Ghosal, Deputy General Manager & CPIO, Indian Bank, Chennai, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the CPIO in his reply stated that the documents sought were not traceable at the branch whereas the FAA in its order informed that there was no insurance coverage for the loan taken by her husband. She wanted to know on what basis the FAA had confirmed that there was no insurance taken. Besides, she argued that the bank had not submitted the subsidy claim to National Horticulture Board within the stipulated time, the subsidy amount to the said loan got cancelled. Accordingly, she and her family had suffered loss and mental agony.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that although the CPIO had replied that documents sought were not traceable, however, when the first appeal was filed before the FAA, they had searched the records thoroughly and provided revised information/reply to the appellant. It was further submitted that there was no insurance coverage for the loan taken by the appellant's husband. Moreover, they informed that even in the sanction letter there was no such clause for insurance coverage.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was provided vide FAA's order dated 21.03.2019 although the CPIO's reply dated 16.02.2019 was incomplete and evasive. That being so, there appears to be no public interest in further prolonging the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुसुरेशचं ा) ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक/Date: 29.09.2021 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत#) Page 3 of 4 Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :

1. INDIAN BANK HEAD OFFICE, RTI DEPARTMENT, 5th FLOOR, 66, RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI - 600001 THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, INDIAN BANK, HEAD OFFICE, RTI DEPARTMENT, 5th FLOOR, 66,RAJAJISALAI, CHENNAI - 600 001 L. RUCKMANI Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission