Madhya Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/11/1380

GHANSHYAM - Complainant(s)

Versus

BANK OF MAHARASHTRA - Opp.Party(s)

SH. M.L. GUPTA

17 May 2019

ORDER

17.5.2019                  Shri V. K. Saxena, learned counsel for appellant.

                                    Shri Amit Tiwari, learned counsel for respondents no.1 to 3.

                                    Shri Umeshwar Dayal, learned counsel for respondent no.7.

                                    This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.8.2011 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Indore (for short the “Forum”) in CC No.732/2011 whereby the appellant’s / complainant’s complaint has been dismissed by the Forum in limine. 

 

                        2.         According to the learned counsel for the appellant the Forum has recorded a conclusion that the complaint is not maintainable without properly appreciating the pleadings and the evidence led by the complainant in support of the complaint.  He submits that before recording the finding that it has no jurisdiction the Forum ought to have issued notices to the respondents in regard to the various pleas raised by the appellant in the

 

 

• 3 -

complaint including the deficiency in service.  On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have supported the impugned order.

 

                        3.         We have perused the impugned order and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and respondents no.1 to 3 and No.7.

 

                        4.         Having gone through the evidence and the impugned order we are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case in question the best course which ought to have been adopted by the Forum to have issued notice to the respondents and to have taken their reply and after considering the same ought to have formed an opinion as to whether the complaint is maintainable or not and whether the bar as contained in Section 34 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short the “SARFAESI Act”) would be applicable or not.  Having not done so we are of the view that the Forum has committed error.  As a result the impugned

 

 

 

• 4 -

 

order deserves to be and is hereby set-aside.  The matter is remanded to the Forum for deciding it afresh.  The Forum shall issue notice to the opposite parties and decide the matter afresh including the question as to whether the complaint would be maintainable or not.

 

5.         All contentions of the parties are kept open.

                        6.         With the aforesaid direction the appeal is disposed of.  The appellant – complainant to appear before the Forum on 18.6.2019.

 

                      (Justice Shantanu S. Kemkar)                       (Dr.Monika Malik)        

           ^{PRESIDENT                                                                    MEMBER}   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

phadke