Sampurna Singh Deo vs DENA BANK

THIS complaint is filed by the complainant on 10.11.1999 under Section 21(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In this complaint he claimed a sum of Rs. 79,20,000/ - as compensation from the opposite party -Dena Bank (Bank for short). The prayer is couched in the following words : ''It is, therefore, humbly requested that the defendants Dena Bank who have acted as selling agents of M/s. WIMCO Limited and also for their malicious act be directed to pay the complainants Rs. 79,20,000/ - (Rs. Seventy nine lac and twenty thousand) at the earliest with cost with suitable interest thereon.''

ACCORDING to the complainant cause of action to file this complaint arose on 4.9.1999 when Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division at Khanna, Distt. Ludhiana in the State of Punjab decreed the suit of the Bank against him disregarding his defence altogether. Bank had filed a suit against the complainant on 29.2.1996 claiming Rs. 9,20,748/ - and interest for the loan granted to him. Direction was also sought in the civil suit filed by the Bank for sale of the agricultural land which complainant had given as security to the Bank for availing the loan. Complainant alleged that a Company M/s. WIMCO Ltd. approached him to buy certain seedlings and also to arrange for a loan from the Bank for the purpose. Loan was sanctioned and some instalments had also been released. However, in March, 1990 Bank refused to disburse further loan. Bank demanded refund of the amount disbursed so far to the complainant. Since the complainant failed, the Bank filed suit against him as aforementioned which suit had since been decreed.

COMPLAINANT says that he has filed this complaint as advised by Security and Exchange Board of India in their some press release. How the claim of Rs. 79,20,000/ - has been made, complainant has given the following details in para 8 of the complaint : ''That due to malicious act, negligence and deficiency in service by the defendant Bank the complainant has suffered financial loss as under : (1) Number of Poplar trees planted = 4400 (2) Minimum expected survival trees = 3300 (3) Expected volume of timber after 8 years = 0.4 x 3300 = 1320 cum (4) Conversion of entire timber into craft sticks : (a) one PKT of 1000 craft sticks wastage = = 1 kg 0.25 kg. (b) 1 CUM Timber = 1500 kgs (c) 1320 CUM Timber Wastage = = 1980000 kgs. 495000 kgs. Craft sticks = 1485000 pkts. Sale price = 1485000 x 10 = Rs. 14850000 Sale of wage Rs. 100/ - per qtl. = Rs. 495000/ - Entire expenditure 50% of sale price = Rs. 7425000/ - Net profit = Rs. 7425000 +495000 Net loss = Rs. 79,20,000/ -''

ON the face of it we find that the complaint is barred by limitation. It cannot be said that cause of action arose when the suit filed by the Bank against the complainant was decreed. As per written version the cause of action arose when the Bank refused to disburse the balance amount of loan. It was in the year 1990. Moreover, the claim made by the complainant cannot be decided in our summary jurisdiction. Neither we have the means nor expertise to go into the various items of claims so claimed in the complaint. It may also be noticed that during the course of the arguments complainant admitted that he had filed a counter claim in the suit filed by the Bank but according to him Honble Civil Judge disregarded his claim.

WE do not find any merit in this complaint and would dismiss the same. However, this dismissal will not come in the way of the complainant if it chooses to file civil suit or approach any other appropriate Forum, if permissible under the law. Complaint dismissed. ===========================================================================