Haryana

StateCommission

A/721/2015

UHBVNL - Complainant(s)

Versus

ASHOK DUA - Opp.Party(s)

AJAY KAUSHIK

02 May 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :           721 of 2015

Date of Institution:          02.09.2015

Date of Decision :           02.05.2016

 

Punjab National Bank through Sh. Dinesh Kumar Gupta, its Power of Attorney Holder and Authorized Officer, Sector 37, Faridabad.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

Avdhesh Singh Chauhan, House No.220/5, Vinay Nagar Colony, Village Agwanpur, Tilpat, Faridabad, Haryana.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member.

                                                                                                         

Present:               Shri Ravi Kant, Advocate for appellant.

None for the respondent.

 

O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

Punjab National Bank-opposite party (for short, ‘Bank’) has challenged the correctness and legality of the order dated May 05^th, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (for short ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Avdhesh Singh Chauhan was allowed. For ready reference, operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-

“7.     Opposite party is directed to deposit the amount of Rs.15,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 9% from the date of filing of this complaint till realization of amount in the aforesaid account of the complainant within thirty days from the date of receipt of this order.  Opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment alongwtih Rs.1100/- as litigation expenses...”

 

2.      Notice was issued to the complainant but he did not appear despite service.

3.      On October 13^th, 2012 at about 7-8 P.M, complainant tried to withdraw Rs.15,000/- from the Automated Teller Machine (ATM) but the same was not disbursed and the amount was shown to have been debited from his account. The complainant requested the Bank to credit the amount in his account but to no avail.   

4.      Notice of the complaint was issued to the appellant.  The appellant through its counsel appeared on March 15^th, 2013 but thereafter none appeared on its behalf and thus was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum.

5.      Learned counsel for the appellant has urged that opportunity be given to the appellant to file reply and contest the complaint.  The impugned order be set aside.

6.      Since the appellant was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum and as such could not contest the complaint on merits, it would be in the interest of justice to give an opportunity to the appellant to contest the complaint on merits. Thus, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. The appellant is accorded opportunity to join the proceedings and parties shall be entitled to lead evidence etc.  The case is remitted to the District Forum to decide the complaint afresh.

7.       The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum on June 01^st, 2016.

8.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

9.      The statutory amount of Rs.11000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

 

Announced: 02.05.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

 

U.K