BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

HYDERABAD.

C.D.No.21 OF 2006

Between:

Sri Md.Arshad Siddiqui,

S/o.Abu Baker, aged about

38 years, Occ:Business,

R/o.H.No.8-1-284/OU/134,

O.U.Colony, Shaikpet,

Hyderabad.                                                                                      

Rep. by his G.P.A.Holder

Sri Abdul Azeem Khan,

S/o.late Abdul Mazeed Khan,

Aged 50 years, Occ:Business,

H.No.12-2-97, Murad Nagar,

Hyderabad-500 028.                                                                        ..Complainant

            And

A.B.N.Amro Bank, N.V.

H.No.6-3-24/1QA, Road No.1,

Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.                                                              ..Opposite Party

Counsel for the Complainant: M/s.B.S.Prasad.

Counsel for the Opposite Party:Admission Stage.

CORAM:THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE I.VENKATANARAYANA, PRESIDENT.

SMT.M.SHREESHA, MEMBER.

AND

SRI P.JAGANNADHAM NAIDU, MEMBER.

FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY,

TWO THOUSAND SIX.

Oral Order:(Per  Hon’ble Mr.Justice I.Venkatanarayana, President).

***

This is a complaint filed under Section 17(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

            The factual matrix leading of the filing of this complaint is set out as hereunder:

            The complainant on behalf of his wife was looking after her proprietrix concern engaged in the marketing of electronic appliances and goods and power of attorney was given to him for managing the business affairs and was also authorized to manage the Bank Account of his wife.  The complainant has represented to the opposite party that  he will he receiving several out station cheques for various amounts and requested the opposite party to provide the facility of credit by purchasing the instruments i.e. cheque discounting facility.  Relying on the assurance of the complainant, the opposite party has purchased the cheques believing that it was a genuine transaction.  Subsequently it transpired that the cheques that were purchased under discount basis have been dis-honoured and the complainant has been illegally withdrawing the amount and the complainant became due for a sum of more than Rs.50,00,000/-.  Taking into account the conduct of the complainant, the opposite party bank issued a complaint to the police in the Central Crime Station, Hyderabad and the police  have been investigating into the matter.  From the exchange of registered notices, it is the case of the opposite party that the complainant has cheated the bank and played fraud to a tune of Rs.48,76,000/- and gained unlawfully.   The complainant appears to have filed suit, O.S.No.2938/2005 on the file of 6^th Junior Civil Judge Court and sought for an injunction restraining the opposite party from interfering with the properties.

            After going through the entire record, we are of the considered opinion that the complaint is not a ‘Consumer Dispute’ and liable to be rejected. 

In the result the complaint is rejected.  No order as to costs.

                                                PRESIDENT. LADY MEMBER. MALE MEMBER.

JM                                                                                           Dt. 5-5-2006.   

//APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE//

Witnesses examined for

Complainant:                                                                                   Opposite Party:

     -Nil-                                                                                                            -Nil-

Exhibits marked on behalf of the complainant:

-NIL-

Exhibits marked on behalf of the Opposite Party:

                                    -NIL-

PRESIDENT. LADY MEMBER. MALE MEMBER.

JM                                                                                           Dt. 5-5-2006.