RESERVED
State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Uttar Pradesh Lucknow
Appeal No. 804 of 2002
Smt Shobhita Gupta
….Appellants
Versus
Central Bank of India
……Respondent
Present:-
- Hon’ble Sri Udai Shanker Awasthi, Presiding Member.
- Hon’ble Sri Mahesh Chand, Member.
None for the Appellant.
Sri B.L.Jaiswal for the Respondent.
Date: 26.04-2016
Judgment
Sri Mahesh Chand,Member-This Appeal has been filed by Smt Shobhita Gupta w/o Shri Akhilesh Kumar Gupta R/o 112/222 Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur, against the order dated 25.1.2002, passed by learned District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Kanpur Nagar, in complaint case No 324/1997 Smt Shobhita Gupta vs Central Bank OF India.
In brief the facts of the case are that the Appellant/Complainant had the S.I. Bank Account No 159 in the Arya Nagar Branch of Central Bank of India, Kanpur. The complainant got issued Stock Invest Instrument from the bank against her aforesaid account by depositing the amount in it, for purchasing the shares of various companies. The opposite party issued the Stock Invest/ Instrument to the complainant. In case the shares are not issued stock invest instrument is returned to the bank and the bank gives credit to the account of the Applicant. In this case also according to the complainant, since the shares were not issued in favour of the complainant and the stock invest instruments were returned to bank , the bank should have given credit to the Complainant’s account
-2-
by the amounts of Rs2500/- and Rs 3500/- respectively total Rs6000/-, but the bank did not do so. Hence she filed the complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Kanpur. The complaint was opposed by the opposite party. The learned District Forum decided the case on merit and dismissed the complaint. Being aggrieved with the order dated 25.1.2002 of the District Forum, the Complainant has preferred this Appeal. The opposite party/ respondent have opposed the appeal and filed the detailed objections.
None was present from the Appellant’s side. Heard learned counsel Mr B.L. Jaiswal, Advocate for respondent and perused the record on file. Since No amount was debited by the Respondent bank from the account of the Appellant while issuing the Stock Invest Instrument for purchasing the shares of various companies but a lien was noted on the deposit in the account of the Appellant. Had the Shares been issued in favor of the Appellant, the said amount would have been debited from the account of the Appellant. Since the shares were not issued to the Appellant and when she returned the Stock Invest Instrument to the bank, bank removed the lien from her account. Since there was no debit from the account, so there was no question of giving credit to it. The learned District Forum have rightly dismissed the complaint. We too agree with the findings of the learned District Forum. There is no need to interfere in the impugned order. The Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Order
In the light of above discussion sand observations the Appeal is dismissed. Parties will bear own costs. Hence No order to the costs.
(Udai Shanker Awasthi) (Mahesh Chand)
Presiding Member Member
S.k. st. c-5
