Case: Sri. Shibu Poddar S/o Lalmohan Poddar Vs Manager, United Bank of India and The Regional Manager, United Bank of India. West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
| Judges | Aloke Chakrabarti, J. (President), A.K. Ray and Silpi Majumder, Members |
| Issue | Consumer |
| Judgement Date | January 29, 2010 |
| Court | West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission |
Order:
S. Majumder, Member, (West Bengal)
-
This appeal has been directed against the judgment passed by the District Forum, Paschim Medinipur, on 25.06.2009, in its case no-13/2009, wherein the Forum below has dismissed the complaint on contest without any cost.
-
The brief facts of the case of the Complainant before the Forum below were that the OP Bank sanctioned a loan of Rs. 34.40 lakhs to the Complainant for a project of Motel cum Restaurant styled as Shilpa Motal cum Restaurant, whereas the total cost of the project was of Rs. 71.81 lakhs. The OP disbursed loan to the tune of Rs. 18.50 lakhs up to 22.06.2007 by phases. But the Bank stopped disbursement of the rest amount on the plea that the Complainant did not utilize the disbursed amount for the purpose it was lent. The Complainant requested the bank for releasing the balance amount so that he could complete the construction. As the Bank did not respond to his appeal, he filed the complaint praying for issuance of directions upon the OPs to pay balance amount of loan of Rs. 15.90 lakhs, Rs. 4,00,000/- towards damage caused and to exempt interest on loan amount already disbursed till disposal of the complaint.
-
Being aggrieved by the abovementioned judgment the Complainant-Appellant has preferred the present appeal before this Commission contending the same facts as stated by him in the complaint petition before the District Forum. In the grounds of memorandum of appeal it has been mentioned by the Appellant that the Forum below has failed to consider that the construction has been made up to lintel level and due to want of money the construction work could not be continued and for this reason he asked for disbursement of the installments which were due from the loan amount from the bank, but it did not pay. It has been further submitted by the Appellant that the Appellant has completed construction more than the work that was assured to be completed with the help of Rs. 18.50 lakhs. Further contention of the Appellant is that he invested a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- from his own pocket for such work and at this stage if the Bank refuse to disburse the balance loan amount, he will be suffered much and according to him the bank did not release the remaining loan amount on flimsy ground which caused serious prejudiced to him and without considering his hardships and problem the Forum has erroneously dismissed the complaint. For this reason the judgment passed by the Forum below should...
To continue reading
Request your trial