ICICI BANK LTD. filed a consumer case on 26 Nov 2015 against A.K. SHARMA& ANR. in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is FA/12/347 and the judgment uploaded on 08 Dec 2015.
Delhi
StateCommission
FA/12/347
ICICI BANK LTD. - Complainant(s)
Versus
A.K. SHARMA& ANR. - Opp.Party(s)
26 Nov 2015
ORDER
IN THE STATE COMMISSION: DELHI
(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)
Date of Decision: 26.11.2015
First Appeal No. 347/2012
(Arising out of the order dated 14.03.2012 passed in complaint case No. 253/2011 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (North-East) Bunkar Vihar Complex, Nand Nagari, Delhi-110093)
In the matter of:
ICICI Bank Ltd.
Land Mark
Race Course Circle
Vadodara
Gujarat
ICICI Bank Ltd.
F-11, Preet Vihar
Delhi Appellant
Versus
Sh. Arun Kumar Sharma
R/o A-31/153, Mata Mandir Marg No. 6
Maujpur, Delhi-110053
LIC
F2-3, Sector 18
Noida Respondents
CORAM
N P KAUSHIK - Member (Judicial)
S C JAIN - Member
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes
N P KAUSHIK – MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Judgement
Present appeal is directed against the orders dt. 14.03.2012 passed by the Ld. District Forum (North-East) Nand Nagri, Delhi-110093. Vide impugned orders the Ld. District Forum directed both the OPs to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- each to the complainant/respondent-1 herein.
Parties hereinafter shall be referred toby their original status in the complaint in the District Forum.
Facts in brief of the complaint filed by Respondent No. 1 Sh. Arun Kumar Sharma are that the complainant was sanctioned a housing loan by LIC Housing Finance in March 2009. The amount was credited in his loan account in April 2009. Instalment of Rs. 6489/- per month used to be paid as per letter of mandate issued by Respondent No. 2 (LIC). Initially complainant paid instalments by way of cheques and submitted papers to Respondent No.2 (LIC). It is also admitted that the loan was being recovered in equal monthly instalment of Rs. 6489/- through ECS.
Next defence raised by Respondent No. 2 (LIC) is that there were two different bank accounts with ICICI Bank and both in the name of two different persons having a common name ‘Arun Sharma’. ECS towards repayment of LIC Housing Finance from the account bearing No. 0030101045602 for an amount of Rs. 26,300/- was made. The said account pertained to another Arun Sharma and not the Arun Sharma before us. A mandate was received from LIC Housing Finance dt. 15/05/2009 to debit the said amount from account bearing No. 000701047914. It was at this juncture that a wrong debit was made from the account of the complainant. Ld. District Forum observed that both the respondents i.e. ICICI Bank and LIC were responsible for depriving the complainant of its legitimate interest accruing to him money lying in the bank. Respondent No. 1 (ICICI Bank) was aware of the fact that the complainant gave instructions for ECS only for an amount of Rs. 6489/- while debiting the amount of Rs. 26,300/-. Respondent No. 1 ought have been vigilant.
Plea taken by the appellant/OP-1 is that the mandate was already verified by LIC and they were not required to cross check the particulars. We do not agree with the contention putforth by the appellant herein as they were not required to work with their eyes closed. Even a computer could not have committed the mistake of this type. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the appeal preferred by the appellant/OP-1 (ICICI Bank). Appeal is hence dismissed.
A copy of the orders be made available to the parties free of costs as per rules and thereafter the file be consigned to Records.
FDR, if any, deposited by the appellant be released as per rules.
(N P KAUSHIK)
MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
(S C JAIN) MEMBER
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.