Orissa

Cuttak

CC/141/2021

Janaki Shiala - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,State Bank Of India - Opp.Party(s)

R K Dash

13 Sep 2022

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

                                                                                   C.C.No.141/2021

Janaki Shiala @ Janaki Shial,

W/O:Sri Kailash Shiala,

Vill:Murtunga,P.O:Kalaspur,

P.S:Simulia,Via:Balikhand,Dist:Balasore.                                           ... Complainant.

 

                                                Vrs.

1.        Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,Simulia Branch,

At:Simulia,PO:Markona,Dist:Balasore-756126.

      

2.        Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,At:Mahanadi Vihar,

P.O:Nuabazar,P.S:Chauliaganj,

Dist:Cuttack-753004.

 

3.        Inspector In-Charge,Chauliaganj Police Station,

At/PO:Chauliaganj,Dist:Cuttack-753003.                                ... Opp. Parties.

                       

Present:               Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                                Sri Sibananda Mohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    06.09.2021

Date of Order:   13.09.2022

 

For the complainant:          Mr. R.K.Dash,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.Ps   1 & 3  :          None.

For the O.P No.2:                 Mr. A.K.Mishra,Adv. & Associates

 

Sri Debasish Nayak,President

            Case of the complainant bereft unnecessary details as made out from the complaint petition in short is that she had a Savings Bank account with O.P No.1 having Account no.36817490229.  She had possessed a sum of Rs.53,842/- in the said bank account as on 25.6.21.  She has further stated that her mobile phone got damaged and lateron she received information from Chauliaganj Police Station regarding some cheating done by one Sagar Nag and another Supriya Nayak who had used her mobile phone number and had thereby cheated one Susil Chandra Mallick to the tune of Rs.6,00,000/- as regards to the medical admission of his daughter for which G.R.Case no.1135 of 2020 is pending before the learned JMFC,City.  Thus, as per the direction of O.P No.3 who is IIC,Chauliaganj P.S, O.P no.2 had freezed the said account of the complainant and letter dt.17.8.21 to that effect was issued.  It is for this, the complainant has filed this case claiming her deposited amount of Rs.53,840/- alongwith compensation towards her mental agony and harassment for Rs.45,000/-  and a further sum of Rs.5000/- towards her litigation expenses.  Thus in total the complainant has prayed for a sum of Rs.1,03,840/- from the O.Ps no.1 & 2. 

She has filed copies of her bank passbook to justify her deposit alongwith FIR copy etc.

2.         Out of the three O.Ps as arrayed in this case, O.P No.1 having not contested this case is set exparte whereas O.Ps no.2 & 3 have contested this case but have filed their separate written versions each.  According to the written version of O.P No.2, the case of the complainant is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable.  He admits about the account of the complainant as opened in their bank but has stated about the instructions given by O.P No.3 to put on hold of the said account which was duly obeyed by them and as such there is no deficiency in their service.

 O.P No.2 has filed the letter addressed to him issued by O.P No.3 for freezing the bank account of the complainant.

O.P No.3 who is the IIC,Chauliaganj P.S has stated that on the written report of the complainant Sushil Chandra Mallick; regarding allegation that he was cheated for a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- by one Sagar Nag and another Supriya Nayak who lured him to admit his daughter in Medical College.  They had used mobile phone no.8457845608 which was used by and belongs to the complainant of this case.  Thus, the IIC Chauliaganj P.S through his written version has prayed to continue to freeze the account of the complainant till completion of the investigation of the criminal case which is under process. 

He has filed copies of documents to that effect in order to prove his stand.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition as well as contents in the written version of the contesting O.Ps, this Commission is of a view to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a proper conclusion here in this case.

i.          Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

            ii.         Whether there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

            iii.        Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed?

Issue no.ii.

            Issue no.ii being the most pertinent issue is taken up first for consideration here in this case.

            Admittedly, the complainant was having a mobile phone and she had an account in the bank of O.Ps. 1 & 2.  It is not in dispute as regards to the deposit made by the complainant to the tune of Rs.53,842/- in her bank account as on 25.6.21.  There is allegation that the mobile phone of the complainant was damaged as it had fallen in the water but as per the O.P No.3, the mobile phone number of the complainant was being used by some culprits namely Sagar Nag and Supriya Nayak for cheating one Sushil Chandra Mallick to the tune of Rs.6,00,000/- for medical admission of his daughter.  It is for this, the O.P No.3 who is the IIC Chauliaganj P.S had requested, in writing addressed to O.P No.2 in order to freeze and keep in hold the account of the complainant till the investigation in the said criminal case is complete.  Accordingly, the O.P No.2 had freezed the said account of the complainant.  O.P No.3 through his written version has also requested to continue keeping on hold the account of the complainant without defreezing it till the investigation is complete.  Thus, when the O.P No.3 is a public servant who is investigating into the criminal case, has requested the O.P No.2 for freezing the account of the complainant and by obeying the said instructions of O.P No.3, O.P No.2 had freezed the account,;so there is no deficiency in service noticed on the part of any of the O.Ps here in this case and accordingly this issue is answered.

Issues no.i & iii.

            When the investigation is under process for a criminal case as stated by the IIC Chauliaganj P.S through his written version, the case of the complainant,  can never be said to be maintainable and thus the complainant at present is not entitled to any of the claims as desired by her.  Hence it is so ordered;

                                                            ORDER

            The case is dismissed on contest against all the O.Ps and as regards to facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 13^th day of   September,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.           

                                                                                                                                Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                                            President

                       

                                                                                                                                                              Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                                                 Member