C.C. No. 66 of 2013. Case: R.K. Mining Private Limited Vs State Bank of India. Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberC.C. No. 66 of 2013
CounselFor Appellant: V. Srikantha Rao, Advocate and For Respondents: Vamaraju Srikrishnudu, Advocate
JudgesS. Bhujanga Rao and R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Members
IssueCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Sections 16, 17, 18, 19, 20; Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 11(2)(a), 17(1)(a), 9
CitationI (2015) CPJ 97 (AP)
Judgement DateJanuary 19, 2015
CourtAndhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


R. Lakshminarasimha Rao, Member

  1. The complaint is filed under Section 17(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act seeking direction to the opposite party to return the original documents, to grant an amount of Rs. 90,00,000 towards compensation and damages. The averments of the complaint are that the complainant-company is engaged in business of prospecting, exploring, operating, excavation and mining productions in India and the directors of the complainant-company are the partners of M/s. R.K. Marketing Services and the promoters of M/s. R.K. INFRA and Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd. and on application of the complainant-company for its business necessity, the opposite party-bank sanctioned loan on 23.3.2009 under cash credit account bearing number 30731626126 to the tune of 9 crores. The complainant-company hypothecated its current assets worth of Rs. 15 crores and immovable property worth of Rs. 4.25 lakh besides fixed deposit of Rs. 13 lakh under TD CS No. 0604486 dated 13.3.2009. The complainant-company deposited its original PAN card, Original Incorporation Certificate of the company, Sale Deeds for 4.25 AC of land of Sulthanpur village and Payment of TD CS. No. 0604486, dated 13.3.2009 (FD) for Rs. 13 lakh with interest thereon, with the opposite party-bank on its assurance that the documents would be returned after closure of the loan account.

  2. The complainant-company repaid the entire loan amount on 1.10.2011 and requested the opposite party-bank on 1.10.2011 to close the loan account. The opposite party-bank through its letter dated 10.10.2011 confirmed the closure of loan account and enclosed thereto, demand draft dated 8.10.2011 for balance amount of Rs. 7,20,139. Contrary to the terms of the credit sanction letter, the opposite party-bank had not returned the documents to the complainant. The opposite party-bank upgraded the status of the complainant with CIBIL after it had closed the loan account on 1.10.2011 and confirmed closure of loan account on 10.11.2011 on account of which the complainant-company was disqualified for getting cash credit facility resulting loss of nine tenders amounting to the tune of Rs. 90 lakh to the complainant-company. The complainant-company got issued notice dated 31.1.2013 through its Advocate demanding the opposite party-bank to return the documents and pay damages to the tune of Rs. 90 lakh and the opposite party-bank gave reply on 14.2.2013 with false averments. Hence, the complaint.

  3. ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT