Archive for the ‘Cuttak’ Category

Sudhakar Panda v ICICI Bank

Tuesday, December 29th, 2009

DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

Present:            Sri Manoranjan Hazra,President.

Sri Lingaraj Khadanga,Member.

C.C.No.85/2009

Sh,. Sudhakar Panda,

At/PO:Anijo,Via:B.T.Pur,

Dist:Bhadrak

At present At:Jagannath Sahi,

Kafla,Cuttack.                                                   … Complainant.

Vrs.

1.         Sh. Sasikant Otta,Manager(Recovery),

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

Ist Floor,Bajrakabati Road,

Cuttack.

2.         The Manager(Credit),

ICICI Bank Ltd.,185,Jabnpath,

Kedarson Plaza,Kharvelnagar,BBSR.

3.         The Head Customer Care,

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

P.O.Box No.36,Vashi P.O.Navi Mumbai.

4.         INFINITY SEREVICES (ICICI Recovery Agent),

43/E,2nd Floor,

Ashok Nagar,Bhubaneswar.

5.         Credit Information Bureau(India) Ltd.,

Hoechst House,6th Floor,

193 Backbay Reclamation,

Nariman Point,Mumbai.                                     … Opposite Parties.

JUDGMENT DT.29.12.09

Sri Lingaraj Khadanga,Member

Alleging deficiency in service in charging additional amount beyond Rs.1,08,200/- paid by the complainant against final compromise against loan account No.LPCTK 00001030237, this case has been filed claiming Rs.18,05,400/- on different counts as in the  complaint petition.

1.                  At the outset, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Parties.1 to 4 challenges maintainability of the case on the ground that the case is barred by limitation in as much as cause of action has arose on 18.11.05 and case has been filed on 16.3.09.

2.                  On perusal of records, we find, the complainant from his loan statement Annex-1 dt.1.4.03, availed a loan of Rs.98,000/- from the Opposite Parties and the case has been compromised on 18.11.05(Annex-4).  After that, a legal notice has been issued on 9.1.07 and no further evidence has been produced by the complainant to satisfy us the limitation as prescribed U/S.24 of the Consumer Protection Act. No limitation application has been filed.

1.                  Since the case is barred by limitation, we hold that the case is not maintainable on the above grounds without going into merits of the case.

Judgment pronounced in the open Forum on this the 29th day of   December,2009 under the seal and signature of this Forum.

President.                                                                                           Member.