STATE BANK OF INDIA vs M/S. TELANG MOTORS PVT. LTD.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 1.4.2014 passed by the Goa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panaji (in short, ''the State Commission'') in Complt. No. 09/2010 ? M/s. Telang Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India by which, complaint was partly allowed

Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/Respondent is dealer of motorcycles manufactured by M/s. TVS Motor Co. Ltd. For expansion of business complainant/respondent obtained loan of Rs.40.00 lakhs from OP/appellant and had to pay interest on this amount. OP demanded loan amount. OP was requested for one time settlement and waiver of interest, but OP refused and complainant had to sell his other property at very low price. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before State Commission and claimed Rs. 85,26,000/- towards interest, loan, damages, etc. OP resisted complaint, admitted grant of loan and submitted that when OP felt that complainant is not able to make regular payments, demanded loan amount and there was no question of one time settlement and waiver of interest. Denying any deficiency on their part, prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned State Commission after hearing parties, allowed complaint partly and directed OP to pay compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- against which, this appeal has been filed.

None appeared for respondent even after service of notice and he was proceeded ex-parte.

Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and perused record.

Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant had every right to ask for repayment of loan and there cannot be any deficiency in refusing to one time settlement and waiver of interest and learned State Commission committed error in allowing compensation of 3,00,000/- lakhs; hence, appeal be allowed and impugned order be set aside.

Perusal of impugned order reveals that in para 24 it was mentioned that rejecting complainant''s offer of one time settlement by OP was discriminatory, unreasonable and unjustifiable. I do not find any reason in the impugned order for aforesaid observations and lender is always entitled to call for loan from the OP and by no stretch of imagination, lender can be held deficient in rejecting request for one time settlement or waiver of interest. It is the choice of lender to settle claim by one time settlement and in that process waive some interest, but complainant borrower cannot compel lender to agree for one time settlement and waiver of interest.

Learned State Commission also observed that empanelled Advocate of OP was negligent in not taking certain precautions while preparing the report pertaining to the title of the property. This cannot be a ground of deficiency on the part of OP while advancing loan on that property.

In the light of aforesaid discussion, it becomes clear that learned State Commission committed error in allowing complaint partly without any basis and without any deficiency on the part of OP in recalling loan and refusing to one time settlement and waiver of interest and appeal is to be allowed.

Consequently, appeal filed by appellant is allowed and impugned order dated 1.4.2014 passed by the learned State Commission in Complt. No. 09/2010 ? M/s. Telang Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India is set aside and complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.