STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
APPEAL NO. 366 OF 2O15
(Against judgment and order dated 07-01-2015 in Complaint
Case No.201 of 2013 of the District Consumer Forum, Oraiya )
Central Bank of India
Branch Mihouli
Pargana, Tehsil & District Oraiya
Through Branch Manager
...Appellant
Vs.
Ajeet Kumar, S/o Pramod Kumar Gupta
R/o Tilak Nagar Oraiya
Pargana and District Oraiya
...Respondent
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
HON’BLE MR. RAM CHARAN CHAUDHARY, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. SANJAY KUMAR, MEMBER
For the Appellant : Mr. Zafar Aziz, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Shiv Prakash Gupta, Advocate.
Dated : 07-10-2017
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT(ORAL)
This is an appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 07-01-2015 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Oraiya in Complaint No. 201 of 2O13 Ajeet Kumar V/s Central Bank of India and another whereby the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint and ordered opposite parties to pay Rs.5,05,000/- to complainant with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of complaint till date of actual payment.
Feeling aggrieved with judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum opposite party of the complaint has filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Mr. Zafar Aziz appeared for appellant.
Learned Counsel Mr. Shiv Prakash Gupta, appeared for respondents.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.
In brief relevant facts for determination of appeal are that the respondent/complainant has filed above complaint before District Consumer Forum, Oraiya wherein it has been stated that he has a saving account in Mihouli branch of appellant bank. He came to know about embezzlement
:2:
allegedly made in Mihouli branch of the bank. Thereafter he went to bank and came to know that Rs.5,00,000/- deposited by him on 15-09-2011 has not been shown deposited in his account in bank papers. Consequently he made complaint with the bank but could not get result.
Opposite parties have filed written statement before District Consumer Forum on behalf of appellant bank wherein it has been stated that the complaint has account in Mihouli branch of bank but Rs.5,00,000/- has not been deposited in his account on 15-09-2011.
In written statement it has also been further stated that cashier Ganga Prasad Cashier of bank has committed embezzlement. He is facing trial.
After having gone through pleadings of parties as well as evidence on record the District Consumer Forum has drawn conclusion that respondent/complainant has deposited Rs.5,00,000/- on 15-09-2011 as alleged in complaint and has passed impugned judgment and order as mentioned above.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is against law and evidence.
Learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant has supported impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum.
We have considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties.
Respondent/complainant has filed original passbook of bank. In impugned judgment and order the District Consumer Forum has mentioned that original passbook of respondent/complainant is with the bank and respondent/complainant has filed photocopy of passbook in which an entry has been made to the effect that Rs.5,00,000/- has been deposited on 15-09-2011 in the account of complainant and Rs.20,000/- has been deposited on 29-10-2011.
The appellant bank has not produced original passbook before District Consumer Forum. As such the District Consumer Forum has rightly placed reliance on photocopy of passbook and has rightly held that deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- on 15-09-2011 is proved. As such the District Consumer Forum has rightly ordered appellant bank to make payment of this amount to
:3:
respondent/complainant.
After having gone through pleadings of parties as well as evidence on record we are of the view that finding recorded by District Consumer Forum cannot be said to be against evidence and law. As such the District Consumer Forum has rightly ordered appellant bank to make payment of Rs.5,00,000/-.
The District Consumer Forum has awarded cost of Rs.2,000/- to complainant. Cost awarded by District Consumer Forum appears just and appropriate but Rs.3,000/- compensation awarded by District Consumer Forum to complainant for mental agony is unjustified and is liable to be set aside in the circumstances of the case as the misappropriation is alleged to have been committed by an official of the bank and bank is ordered to make payment of the amount in question on the basis of vicarious liability.
In view of above appeal is allowed partially. Rs.3,000/- awarded by District Consumer Forum as compensation for mental agony to complainant is set aside and the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is modified. Appellant bank is directed to make payment of Rs.5,00,000/- to complainant with interest at the rate payable on deposits of account of complainant from the date of complaint till date of payment.
The appellant bank is further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- cost awarded by District Consumer Forum to complainant.
In this appeal parties shall bear their own costs.
Rs.25,000/- deposited by appellant under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in this appeal shall be remitted to District Consumer Forum alongwith interest accrued for disposal in accordance with this judgment.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A H KHAN )
PRESIDENT
( R C CHAUDHARY )
MEMBER
( SANJAY KUMAR )
MEMBER
