Skip to main content

State Bank of India : Bank cancels loan after approval, set to pay 1 lakh fine

Cancelling a loan that it had sanctioned has earned State Bank of India a stiff fine of 1 lakh.

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled in favour of a garment export company and directed SBI to pay the owner of the firm the sum as compensation for causing him mental agony.

The firm's proprietor, K Ramani, applied for a loan of 24 lakh from the Small and Medium Enterprise City Credit Centre of State Bank of India, Egmore.

In his submission to the consumer redressal commission, he said bank officials thoroughly scrutinised documents pertaining to the expansion of his enterprise and sanctioned a loan of 22.5 lakh. He submitted all documents required for the loan, including the title deed of land owned by his daughter as mortgage.

However, the bank later refused to release the loan, stating that it found discrepancies in the submitted documents. The bank's action was arbitrary and unjust, Ramani said.

In its counter, the bank said it did release the loan because Ramani had cited an inflated amount for purchases and bank officials had doubts regarding a business unit that had placed an order with his firm. The bank said it could cancel the disbursement of a loan at any stage if doubts arose regarding the viability of the project for which it was extending credit. It said Ramani's daughter was a minor and could not execute a title deed.

The bench comprising president R Regupathi and judicial member A K Annamalai pointed out that the bank had not verified all documents before sanctioning the loan.

Though the bank had the authority to reject the loan, the bench questioned the manner in which it exercised that authority, stating that it should not have caused "embarrassment to a customer" and made him "run from pillar to post for several months". The bench said the bank's refusal to disburse the loan after sanctioning it amounted to deficiency in service.

It directed SBI to pay a compensation of Rs 1 lakh for mental agony to the complainant and 10,000 as costs. However, it said it could not issue directions to the bank to disburse the loan.

Article referred: http://www.4-traders.com/STATE-BANK-OF-INDIA-9058834/news/State-Bank-of-India--Bank-cancels-loan-after-approval-set-to-pay-1-lakh-fine-17748683/

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...
1 comment
Read more

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...
1 comment
Read more