RESERVED

     STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                   UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW

                                    COMPLAINT NO. 60 OF 1993

Ikram Bari Shamshi (Sole Proprietor)

S/o Late Sri H. Abdul Bari

M/s Barison & Co.

P.O. Box No. 62, Bari House

Mohd. Ali Road, Moradabad

                                                                                       … Complainant

                                                          Versus

1. Allahabad Bank

Through its Chairman

Netaji Subhash Road

2. Allahabad Bank

City Branch Office

Through its Branch Manager

                                                                                 ....Opposite Parties                               

BEFORE:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. H. KHAN, PRESIDENT

For the Complainant          :  Sri Rajesh Chadha, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties    :  Sri Deepak Mehrotra, Advocate.

Dated :  16-08-2019

                                              JUDGMENT

PER MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT

This is a complaint filed by complainant Ikram Bari Shamshi before this State Commission against opposite parties (1) Allahabad Bank, through its Chariman, Netaji Subhash Road, Calcutta and (2) Allahabad Bank, City Branch Office, Moradabad through its Branch Manager under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking following relief.

“Therefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to pay Rs.2,54,425/- alongwith 12% interest per year with the increased rate of Dollar, and pay damages and cost as this Hon’ble Court may please deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

As per complaint complainant is sole proprietor of M/s Barison & Co., P.O. Box No.62, Bari House, Mohd. Ali Road, Moradabad and is

:2:

carrying on business of export in the name and style of M/s Barison & Co.

In execution of export order received from M/s Altaring New Orleans, I.A. (U.S.A.) he sent consignment to M/s Altaring New Orleans, I.A. U.S.A. and handed over bill of lading and other papers of said consignment to the bank of opposite parties to forward said documents to Colonial Bank, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A. against payment of collection No.  102/12/1/C/270042 dated 10-01-1985 for US Dollar 3629.02 and collection No. 102/12/2/C/270043 dated 10-01-1985 for US Dollar 6548.81. Thereafter he received teleprinter message from the shipping company that the consignee has taken delivery of consignment but payment was not credited in his account. He made several requests with bank of opposite parties to get export proceeds of his above consignment but could not get payment. Consequently he gave legal notice to opposite parties and filed complaint before State Commission.

Opposite parties have filed joint written statement wherein it has been stated that the bank of opposite parties has forwarded documents to the Colonial Bank with instruction to deliver documents to consignee after taking payment. The Colonial Bank has not acted in accordance with direction and instruction of complainant and has handed over documents of consignment to consignee without receiving payment. Colonial Bank of New Orleans is necessary party in complaint but it has not been impleaded in complaint. Therefore, complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary party. 

In written statement it has been stated by the opposite parties that the bank of opposite parties made all possible effort to get payment for complainant. Bank wrote several letters to said Colonial Bank and approached Reserve Bank of India also.

In written statement it has been stated by the opposite parties that the complaint is not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 because cause of action has arisen prior to enactment of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

In written statement it has also been stated by the opposite parties that the complaint is barred by limitation.

Affidavit of Sri Ikram Bari Samshi has been filed in support of

:3:

complaint alongwith annexures.

Affidavit of Sri Surendra Kumar Manglik, Senior Manger in City Branch Office of Allahabad Bank, Moradabad has been filed in support of written statement filed by opposite parties.

Learned Counsel Sri Rajesh Chadha appeared for complainant.

Learned Counsel Sri Deepak Mehrotra appeared for opposite parties.

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused records.

Indisputably the Consumer Protection Act 1986 has come into force on 15-04-1987 vide notification No. S.O. 390(E) dated 15-04-1987. As per complaint bill of lading and other documents of consignment were transmitted through bank of opposite parties to Colonial Bank, New Orleans, Lousiana, U.S.A. in year 1985 for delivery to consignee after taking payment. Annexure 6 of complaint is copy of teleprinter message whereby complainant has been informed that the consignment has been delivered to consignee on 03-05-1985. As per complaint it is the case of complainant that the Colonial Bank of U.S.A. has delivered bill of lading and documents of consignment to the consignee without crediting payment in the account of complainant. As such the alleged deficiency in service has been committed on 03-05-1985 prior to enactment of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and the Consumer Protection Act 1986 has not been enforced with retrospective effect.

In view of discussion made above present complaint is not maintainable under the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

                                     ORDER

Complaint is dismissed with liberty to complainant to approach proper court or authority in accordance with law.

Parties shall bear their own costs.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.

                                                                ( JUSTICE A H KHAN )

                                                                                 PRESIDENT

          Pnt.