This is the [35] Annexures from of state bank of India for
more information click on
Sanjay
Khatri Office
Advocate
4-KA-32, Jawahar Nagar
Rajasthan High Court Phone: 
0141-2650955 ,
0141-2650955 ,
Mobile No.9461616626
Chamber: 23, Lawyer’s, Chamber.
Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur-302005
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dated:
31.05.2011
The Chairman,
State Bank of India,
State Bank Bhawan,
4th Floor, Nariman Point,
Mumbai-400021.
Kind Attention: Shri Prateep Choudhury
Ref.: Loan
Account No’s. (i) 30790086642 (TL Account ); (ii) 30790105601 (TL Account)
and
(iii) 30790238803 (CC Limit) of M/s Rosebay Agro Farms Pvt. Ltd.
(iii) 30790238803 (CC Limit) of M/s Rosebay Agro Farms Pvt. Ltd.
Sub.:
Request for conducting inquiry against
Shri K.L. Chourdia, R.K. Nehra, V.K. Lakhani
& Shri D.B. Shiwach.
Sir,
This
is our painful duty to report to this good office the series of uninterrupted unlawful
and mischievous conduct of the abovementioned officers of State Bank of India at Raila
Branch and Zonal Office Jaipur (now shifted to Udaipur), causing irreparable losses to M/s
Rosebay Agro FarmsPvt. Ltd. a Company incorporated under the Companies Act.
having its registered office at 4, Vishnu Path, Satya Vihar, Lalkothi, Jaipur,
Rajasthan (here-in-after referred as the complainant company/complainant
borrower). The series of wrong doings reported here-in-below in our humble
opinion is injurious to the hard earned reputation of S.B.I., which we suppose
is making the India
proud throughout the globe by carrying out the banking business professionally
and technically at par with the other leading banking national and
international companies and institutions. Despite repeated intimations and
complaints at different levels of the institution, no corrective measures are
taken till date, exposing us to grave pain and agony. We are
betrayed by the unchecked misdeeds of said officers and our faith in such an
esteemed institution is on the death bed and it can only survive by the strong,
effective corrective and deterrent actions
by Apex level of the institution as against the offending officers who are till
date unleashed. However, this is the not only the sole reason, which made us to
report to this good office the excessive and unreasonable conduct of the offending
officers in reference, but also the inspiration with which this project is being
instituted by the Complainant Company. This pious project has suffered
impediment, because of the mechanical, collusive and criminal conduct of the
officials under reference without giving even a thought to the very fact that
this project is being established not merely for the financial gains but also
for the benefit of the society at large.
In
the above premise your good-self will be glad to learn that the Complainant borrower
is inter-alia engaged in operating an Organically Certified Cows Dairy Project,
at Raila. (A project financed by your esteemed bank through Raila Branch). It would
not be out of place to mention here that this is a unique project of its own
kind which involves nurturing of cows in natural environment with the sole
objective to produce and promote hygienic and healthy dairy product in the
indigenous market. This project was technically and commercially designed to
achieve the commercial/financial interest simultaneously promoting the
unadulterated milk/milk-product for the upcoming generations, by avoiding usage
of chemicals etc. It is also apposite to note here that this project was even applauded
by the various teams from your Bank, who paid visit at a number of instances at
the project site.
The
brief gist of the events, which compelled us to lodge this complaint against
the above-mentioned officers of your esteemed banking institution, is as under:-
(A)
Recomputation of the EMI delayed with
the sole motive to harass:-
(i)
Dated
5.11.2007:- Inter-alia on execution of hypothecation agreement
pertaining to the hypothecation of assets etc. referred there-under and the
Schedule appended therewith, AND mortgage deed pertaining to the mortgage of
land by the borrower in favour of the Bank specifically referred to in the Schedule
appended therewith, initially a term
loan of Rs. 57 lakh and a C.C. Limit of Rs. 3 lakh was sanctioned to the Complainant
Company.
(ii)
That
up-to 5.9.2008 :- The Complainant Company utilized Rs. 32 lakh (Approx) out of the above
sanctioned term loan of Rs. 57 lakh, that is to say, that until up to 6.9.2008
term loan of Rs. 32 lakh only was disbursed and utilized out of the sanctioned
amount of Rs. 57 lakh.
(iii) That on 6.9.2008 :- Enhancement
of a term loan of Rs. 88 lakhs over
and above the term loan of Rs. 32 lakhs disbursed/utilized was allowed
along-with with the sanction of the enhanced
C.C. limit to extent of Rs. 20 lakh.
(iv) That
despite the fact that Complainant Company has utilized 32 lakh only out of the
above sanctioned term loan of 57 lakh meaning thereby that 23 lakh from the
same remained unutilized, the installment pertaining to same were not recomputed
by the then officials of the Raila Branch, despite repeated requests and
reminders from the Complainant Company.
(v)
That
the request of the Complainant Company and the directions of the Regional
office to recompute EMI, were ignored repeatedly by the offending Branch
Manager, Raila with the ulterior motives.
(vi) That
when the repeated oral requests were not taken care of, the complainant vide their letter dated 06.11.2008 (Annex.-1) inter-alia formally requested
the Branch Manager in writing to reschedule their installments pertaining to
the above term loan in consonance with amount actually utilized/disbursed, but
he did not bothered take pains to get settle the matter.
(B)
The Offending Branch Manager, Raila has
not visited Complainant Dairy on 25.12.2008: -
(i) We
draw attention of this Hon’ble Chair that the pretext on which the Branch
Manager Shri K.L. Chourdia discontinues the disbursement of duly sanctioned
loan was totally malafide and mischievous. It is amazing to noted that the
stipulation in the letter dated
25.12.2008 (Annex.-2) (which was X-mas
day) pertaining to the visit of the Learned Branch Manager, Raila to
the complainant’s dairy at Raila was the Bank holiday and also a universal
holiday, which itself is self speaking of his misdeeds and facts of the case. We
have to state and submitted that the Branch Manager, Raila has not visited our
dairy at Raila for inspection on 25.12.2008 and the stipulation in respect
thereof is erroneous as is also event on the face of record. There is no
denying the fact that this is a designed conspiracy against the complainant.
The entire text of the letter under reference was erroneous, unfounded and
arbitrary. Enquiry may please be conducted for the verification of this vital
fact.
(ii) That
despite the fact that the so called objections/short comings pointed out by the Branch Manager was replied
precisely point-wise by the complainant vide their letter dated 06.01.2009, (Annex.-3) but no head
whatsoever was paid by him as he was inclined upon to harass/ruin complainant
simply for his personal vested interests.
(iii) In
the above premise the act of discontinuing of partly disbursement of the sanctioned
loan without any plausible reason shows the helplessness of the management of
the State Bank of India
against its own corrupt officers, meaning thereby that the offending officers
were unleashed.
(iv) It
would not be out of place to mention here that the aggrieved complainant
through its Director Shri Suneel Dutt Goyal conducted various meetings with the
Branch Manager Shri K.L. Chourdia and the then Chief Manager Agriculture Shri R.K.
Nehra followed by the pleadings before the Hon’ble A.G.M. Shri V.K. Lakhani
with the hope to get the justice. But ironically and to our utter surprise both
Shri K.L. Chourdia and Shri R.K. Nehra bypassed the very specific and categorical
orders of their superior.
(C) Matter
taken up with L.H.O. New Delhi:
That
being aggrieved by the misdeeds of the offending Branch Officer and realizing
the helplessness of Shri V.K. Lakhani, left with no option, on 17.03.2009 the
complainant through its Director paid visited to Shri Rakesh Sharma the then
General Manager, Local Head Office New Delhi, who was kind enough to give time
for the thorough examination of truth and paid serious attention to the grievance
of the complainant. Taking this opportunity the complainant briefed him the
project, its implementation, projection and planed expansion. Realizing thereby
the avoidable hardship faced by us, our continuing performance as borrower, our
track record of repayment, our present status and practical aspect of future
expansion plans, he most gracefully apologized for the hardship faced by us to
caused by the misdeeds of the Branch Manager and C.M. Agriculture, assuring to resolve
our grievances followed by full corporation in future. In
this process he on the spot deputed from his office Shri S.C. Verma the then
C.M. Agriculture, who alongwith Shri R.K. Nehra and Shri Sharafat Hussain
inspected the complainant’s dairy project at Raila on 30/31th March, 2009. In
the follow up action he prepared a detailed note pertaining to his on the spot
observations in company with the above mentioned officers and submitted the
report to the D.G.M., where from it was forwarded to Shri Rakesh Sharma G.M. New Delhi. On
the clarification sought for by us from
Shri S.C. Verma regarding his opinion and findings on the project we were being informed that he was thoroughly
impressed on all technical and financial aspects and that the feedings and information rendered by the Branch Manager,
Raila and C.M. Agriculture, Jaipur
were
erroneous. We were further glad to learn that he has further sanctioned the loan of around 16
lakhs odd., to us, followed by advisory
note to the concerned officer at Jaipur some-where in the last week of
April, 2009. We were advised by him to
visit the offices of C.M. Agriculture Jaipur and A.G.M. Jaipur in connection
with the same. But despite continuous follow-up and a series of visits to said
offices at Jaipur, they refused of having being received any intimation/direction/note
from the Local Head Office, New Delhi.
On
the contrary they upraised the degree of harassment and by making mockery of
very well established Banking procedures and norms, against their powers asked
them to submit fresh proposals of project in reference, for being
reassessed by those unleashed and unaccountable officers. During this
period of harassment Shri Nehra and Shri Chourdia at a number of instances
abused the complainant, claiming to teach him a lesson for taking up the matter
with L.H.O. New Delhi.
It is equally important to note here that instead of allowing the further
sanction of 16 Lakhs as mentioned above, they on a designed conspiracy
committed an intentional mistake in calculation resulting in disbursement of
loan amount on the lower side to the extent of 7 to 8 lacs of rupees.
Aggrieved
thereby on 12.05.2009 (Annex.-4) the
complainant through a fax massage followed by speed post reported the entire
instances to the General Manager, New Delhi requesting him to intervene and do
needful for the restoration of bonafide banking practices.
(D) Criminalization
of conspiracy and collusion:
Enraged
by the fearless demands of justice by the complainant followed by continuous
agitation before L.H.O., New Delhi
inspite of correcting themselves the officers against whom this inquiry is demanded
became even more fearless, so much so, they dared to bypass the directions of
L.H.O. to cooperate with the borrowers. In this series, in the evening of
12.05.2009 a phone call was received from the office of Shri Nehra to collect
an envelop. When the messenger from the complainant visited Shri Nehra’s
office, he was made to received and acknowledge, a sealed envelop. To our utter
surprise we received in it a letter issued
vide S.No.-6/SK/21547 dated 10.05.2009 (Annex.-5)
(Sunday) by Shri Nehra.
From the fact that until 11.05.2009 when Suneel Dutt Goyal visited the office
of Shri Nehra no mentioned whatsoever was made by him regarding any of the
content/contemplation in this said letter, which
was again amazingly issued on a day which is a holiday. The entire set off
of circumstances clearly corroborate that the said letter was also a part of
conspiracy so as to misguide and betray the L.H.O. This is our humble opinion
is unpardonable. It is pertinent to note
here that 10.05.2009 i.e. the date of the issue of the letter, being a Sunday
was the bank holiday indicating a conspiracy in its. It is equally
important to note here that the procedural compliance sought for by Shri Nehra
from the borrower was not only impractical but beyond the scope and purview of
the letter of the statute.
(E) Apparent malafides:
From
the series of the events narrated above the apparent malafides of the concerned
officers can not be denied. They were inclined upon to kill this beautiful
project for their own vested interests. Your good self will appreciate that
every act of offence is directly and indirectly connected with some personal
and vested interest/motive and this case was also not an exception to it. Until
now we had tried our level best to gracefully avoid to reveal the shameful face
of the case that is the corruption. We most humbly and respectfully bring to
the kind attention of this Hon’ble Chair that all the harassment imposing us
not only to the financial, but also to mental pain and agony has been faced by
us, simply because we refused to bow down against their illegitimate demands. The
entire facts of the events, which are self explanatory was for the first time
brought on record vide our letter dated
13.05.2009 (Annex.-6)
addressed to the General
Manager, L.H.O. New Delhi
revealing the principle cause of our sufferings. In consequence of this
complaint the complainant was called upon to visit the office of Shri Lakhani,
when the complainant paid visit to office Shri Lakhani and Shri Nehra
threatened and abused the complainant. They were confident enough that no
action whatsoever would be taken against them on this very bonafide complaint.
Their language was unconstitutional and slang and does not match the prestige
of S.B.I. and dignity of their profession. The word used by those very learned
officers were so corrupt that it is not possible to reproduce them in writing, it is however humbly advisable to make it a
part of integral inquiry.
That
the complainant vide their letter dated
26.5.2009 (Annex.-7) and 1.06.2009 (Annex.-8) addressed
to the General Manager S.B.I. and D.G.M. SBI respectively reported their
grievances narrating the entire events in chronological order. It was very
specifically and categorically pointed out that the letter dated 10.05.2009 was absurd and directions
rendered there under can not be complied with. The content of our said letters are
self explanatory and corroborative enough to prove and establish our view point
and allegations.
(F) Unwarranted Rephasement without any
default or any demand from the Branch of any over due amount:
That
until 03.06.2009 no relief whatsoever was provided to the borrower. Thus on 04.06.2009 (Annex.-9) the
complainant wrote a letter to A.G.M. Jaipur requesting to provide a practical
and judicious solution. In this series of events we received letter dated 05.06.2009 (Annex.-10) from
the Branch Manager Shri Chourdia stipulating recomputation and sanction term
loan and C.C. limit, afresh on the erroneous pretext of mechanical, "Rephasement
of overdue amount", of above mentioned first term loan and second term
loan. It would not be out of place to mention
here that no amount was over due on account of said term loans. If any, it
would have been for the reason of designed and conspired computation error by
the Branch itself. It is also important to note here that before and until this
rephasement, complainant borrower had not received any letter of demand or
settlement of account from the Branch. On their visit to the Branch Office
pertaining to the issue covered by the aforesaid letter and with pious motive
to resolved issue amicably we only accepted the said proposals under business
compulsions. We were however amazed and shocked to learn the actual state of
affairs. In the nut shell it was noticed that the bill of expenses submitted by
us for disbursement of the term loan were debited erroneously in the wrong
headings pertaining to the purpose for which the particular disbursement was
sought for and utilized by the complainant borrower. This resulted in mismatch
in the entire account of the Bank's statement of account. It was also noticed
that the ratio of bank and promoters contribution were not inconformity with
the sentiment and sprit of the Sanction letter. These series of errors which
were the follow up of the denial of correction and recomputation of E.M.I. as
stipulated in the forgoing paragraphs, resulted in the situation, which was
thoroughly irreversible, so left with no option we accepted the new proposals stipulated in the
said letter dated 05.06.2009. When this
matter was reported to the AGM and C.M. Jaipur, he instead of directing the
Branch to correct the errors, coercively closed both the term loan and C.C.
accounts in operation and reframed the new accounts, mechanically causing the
complainant undue hardship and delay resulting in exposing them to grave mental
pain and agony followed by pecuniary losses. In the nut shell the rephasement of loan was done purposely under duress,
so as to veil the error in accounts by the Branch Manager, Raila. At this
juncture, it is important to note that for the opening and operation of the
said new accounts after force full and unlawful rephasement, the complainant
was made to submit the entire set of document afresh followed by filing of
documents of charge of satisfaction to the Registrar of Companies, Rajasthan
and deed of relinquishment to the Department of Revenue, Govt. of Rajasthan, by
the bank, inter-alia declaring there-under that there were no dues whatsoever
of the borrower company as against the debtor bank. This is, in further contradiction
to their letter dated 05.06.2009 pertaining to the credit facilities
arrangement, wherein this arrangement of the bank was referred to as “Rephasement
of overdue amount of 1st Term Loan and 2nd Term Loan."
(G) Deprived of the Sanctioned C.C.
limit:
The
Sanctioned C.C. Limit of 20 lakhs was erroneously freezes to Rs. 7.50 lakhs
which was later-on with the intervention of Shri Vipin Jain (who joined as
Chief Manager, Agriculture in place of Shri Nehra) was extended to Rs. 11.75
Lakhs and further extended on his kind intervention and directions to 15 Lakhs.
However when Shri Vipin Jain was relieved and new officer joined, the C.C.
limit was not further extended, depriving thereby the complainant borrower from
their most bonafide and pre-contracted sanctioned amount. This freezing of
sanctioned C.C. limit without any plausible reason and increasing the same in
piece-mile on the repeated agitations of the borrower at different levels is
self speaking and revealing of the facts.
Further
despite repeated request and reminders the borrower was not imparted E-Banking
and Multi City Check Book facilities even though all the relevant documents
were filed and submitted at the very on set. The disbursement of the new term
loan was improper and hindered without any plausible reasons, but with malafide
intension.
(H) Maliciously dragged into litigation followed
by act of defamation:
We narrate here-in-below the offending act
of dragging the complainant into conspired litigation to harass and defame:-
a. The
Form 6(1) pertaining to the creation of charge on agriculture land was duly and
properly executed by the complainant borrower at the instance of the Bank, for
being presented before the Tehsil for mutation in relation to creation of
charge.
b. The
said Form 6(1) when forwarded by the Branch to the concerned office was
returned back for being submitted afresh by the Bank on account of over-writings
and cuttings in the forwarding documents of the Bank.
c. Instead
of rectifying his mistake Branch Manager Mr. Chourdia with ulterior motives
filed an appeal before the Hon’ble A.D.M. Bhilwara making submissions of fact
which are not only fictitious but are of the nature of highest degree of
irresponsibility, arrogance and defamatory in nature
d. In
the haste of teaching us a lesion Mr. Chourdia has gone to the extend of
publishing three defamatory advertisements in the Rajasthan Patrika in the edition
of 21.11.2010 (Annex.-11)
and
that too amazingly at the cost of the complainant borrower.
e. Since
the aforementioned appeal was devoid of any substance or merits, the Bank (appellant)
later-on withdrew the same shamelessly without any apology to the Comlainant
Borrower (defendant).
f. This
childish and irresponsible action of malafide and collusion by Mr. Chourdia has
not only injured the prestige of the complainant borrower but has also betrayed
and defamed the S.B.I..
(I) Project
again inspected and appreciated by new C.M. Agriculture:
However,
a respite of relief was felt when Shri Vipin Jain joined as Chief Manager
Agriculture in place of Shri Nehra. Shri Vipin Jain visited the site of the dairy
project along with Shri Chourdia to verify the actual state of affairs and on
thorough inspection he found the project to be properly planed and executed. No
discrepancies whatsoever were found by him and he was thoroughly impressed with
the entire state of affairs.
(J) Expansion
of the project:-
That
inspired by their performance and bonafide modus operandi of Shri Vipin Jain
the complainant planed for expansion of their project. In anticipation to this
plan of expansion they applied for transfer of their entire accounts from Raila
Branch to Bais Godam Industrial Estate, Branch at Jaipur, followed by submission
of project report for expansion, in August, 2009 (Annex.-12). The gist of events in short in connection
with the same is narrated herein below:
(i)
Nov.
2009:
The vetting of entire project report pertaining to the expansion and the
documents in respect thereof was conducted by Mrs. Sabiha Akhtar the Technical
Officer deputed from the L.H.O. New
Delhi.
(ii) Dec.
2009: The detailed vetting report was forwarded by aforementioned Mrs.
Sabiha Akhtar to the Chomu Branch Distt. Jaipur (Rurul CPC) for further action.
(iii)
Jan. 2010: Apart from minor rectifiable
omissions no major discrepancies were found in the said vetting report.
(iv)
Jan.
2010:
The vetting report was revised /corrected by Mrs. Sabiha Akhtar on the information
provided by the borrower and thereafter the file was forwarded to Mr. D. B. Shiwach, C.M. (RBB, Delhi) unfortunately the batch mate and close
friend of Shri Nehra.
(v)
March,
2010:
Since January matter was mechanically kept in abeyance by the concerned
officer.
(vi)
Apprehending delay and consequently losses,
the matter was reported by the complainant borrower to the G.M. (Network-III), vide
letters dated 23.03.2010 (Annex.-13) and 31.03.2010 (Annex.-14),
pleading his intervention.
(vii)
Despite all the above endeavors the SBI
officials in reference were inclined upon to kill the project and in the
process one Mr. Jai Singh from SBI, Kota was appointed for revetting of the
project simply to suppress the earlier vetting report of Mrs. Sabiha Akhtar,
which was complete and undisputed on all counts.
(viii)
It is important to note here that the said
Mr. Jai Singh was not qualified and competent enough to render any opinion whatsoever
on such technical and financial aspects which can prevail over and have the overriding effect over Mrs. Sabiha
Akhtar's report.
(ix)
It is also important to note that said Mr.
Jai Singh was merely a Recovery Officer appointed by SBI on contacted basis and
acceptance of his report over and above Mrs. Sabiha’s report is against the
protocol or not, is the major issue to be inquired upon.
(x)
It is further important to note here that the
complainant borrower has not been informed at any point of time regarding the issue of revetting by Shri Jai
Singh from SBI Kota nor did the said report
was prepared by him in conformity with the norms.
(xi)
Further-more despite repeated requests the
report was not revealed or discussed with the complainant borrower.
(xii)
It is amazing to note here that vetting of
such a lengthy project/project report was done by him (Mr. Jai Singh) in one
day, which is practically impossible.
(xiii)
Finally the expansion proposals were rejected
mechanically and malafidely, without assigning any plausible reason and
depriving the complainant borrower his right to Natural Justice. They were never being informed as to why
the re-vetting was warranted, what were the principle objections and short
comings reported in the said re-vetting report and why the vetting report of
Shri Jai Singh prevailed over Mrs. Sabiha’s report, who was higher in
qualification, rank and status over him.
(xiv)
We
deeply feel that the claims made by Shri Nehra and Chourdia at the very onset
that they will ruin the complainant and the project, proved to be true in the
end.
(K) Pending
inquiry and track record of the officers also needs to be taken cognizance of:-
It
is apposite to note here that Shri Sanjeev Gupta who was second in command to
Mr. Chourdia at Raila Branch filed a complaint-cum-report pertaining to
financial irregularities and other offensive acts of misconduct and misdeeds committed
by Mr. Chourdia, in the A.G.M. office at Jaipur. Shri Sanjeev Gupta was
transferred to Agra
and the inquiry was kept in abeyance for the reasons best in the knowledge of
Regional Office, Jaipur.
In
continuation of above it may please be noted that the conduct of Mr. Chourdia
has time and again enraged the local customers of the S.B.I., at Raila. In this
series somewhere in the first quarter of 2009 some of the local customers on
the serious allegations of misbehavior by Mr. Chourdia agitated causing damaged
to the Bank’s property (which is on record). The matter was investigated by the
local Police Station and is lying pending in the court of law. This matter find
mentioned in the News Paper causing irreparable damage to the reputation of S.B.I.
It may also be verified that business of the Bank is on continuous declined
during the regime of Mr. Chourdia as Branch Manager, at Raila.
PRAYER
In
the above premise we most humbly and respectfully request this Hon'ble Chair to
take cognizance of the entire sequence of events which is reveling of the designed
and framed conspiracy by the officers of the bank in reference, against the
complaining borrower. You are expected to take strong and effective action
against the said conspirers under intimation to the undersigned and in the
process may depute a team of competent officers from the Head Office, Mumbai. Since
we apprehend influence and pressure in the matter causing miscarriage of
justice, therefore, it is requested to take reasonable care to appoint officers
directly under your command so as to avoid any interference from the offending
officers or their well wishers.
It
is also requested to extend the facilities already sanctioned and may allow our
long awaited expansion of the existing project, under finance, on all counts
whatsoever.
It
is also requested that we may be heard in person before final
adjudication/disposal of our complaint.
We
sincerely hope that your good self will do the needful in conformity with the
principles of Equity, Justice & Good Conscience.
Thanking
you in anticipation.
Humble Complainant
Through Counsel
(Sanjay
Khatri)
Advocate
Please
Note:
Apart from the Annexure Nos.1 to 14 we
have also enclosed our letters dated 11.06.2009; 24.04.2010; 24.04.2010;
19.02.2011 and the Bank’s letter dated 10.12.2009 as Annexure Nos. 15 to 19, disclosing the entire communication
whatsoever for your kind perusal and ready reference.
