Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

CC/7/2018

Kulwant Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Central Cooperative Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.H.S. Mehta

02 Dec 2021

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DI`SPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

FATHGARH  SAHIB.

                                                              Complaint Case No: 07 of 2018

       Date of Institution: 05.03.2018

      Date of Decision: 02.12.2021

Kulwant Kaur wife of Late Sh. Sadha Singh resident of Village Badinpur, Tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib..

 

                                                                          ...........Complainant

Vs.

1. The Fatehgarh Sahib Central Co.Operative Bank Ltd., Branch at Amloh, Tehsil Amloh, Distt Fatehgarh Sahib through its  Branch Manager.
2. Jaswinder Singh son of  Late Sh. Sadha Singh resident of Village Badinpur , tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib.
3. Gian Singh Manager,  The Fatehgarh Sahib Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Branch Vill. Shamashpur,Tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib
4. Amrjit Singh Manager, The Fatehgarh Sahib Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd Branch Vill.  Salana Dulla Singh Wala, Tehsil Amloh , Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib.
5. Kulwant Singh Manager, The Fatehgarh Sahib Central Co-Operrative Bank Ltd. Branch Railway road, Sirhind, Tehsil and Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib.
6. Gurdeep Singh Accountant , The Fatehgarh Sahib Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Branch Vill. Salana Dulla Singh Wala, tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib
7.  Guranjan Kaur Wife of Jaswinder Singh R/o Vill. Badinpur, Tehsil Amloh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib

                                                                  .............Opposite Parties

 

Complaint Under Section 12 to 14  of Consumer Protection Act 1986(Old).

 

Quorum

Sh.Pushvinder  Singh, President

Sh.Manjit Singh Bhinder, Member

   

Present: Sh.Rajinder Singh Mehta, counsel for the    complainant.   

Sh. Chamkaur Singh Tiwana, Counsel for  Opposite Party                No.1.

Sh. Vinay Sood, Counsel for Opposite parties no. 3 to 6.

         Opposite Parties 2 and 7  Ex-parte.

ORDER

By Pushvinder  Singh, President

 

                      The present complaint was filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant (hereinafter referred as ‘CC’ for short) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred as “OPs” for short) Under Section 12 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (Old).

  2.                  In the complaint, Kulwant Kaur, CC stated that she  had opened her account no.5056 on dated 09.12.2000 in the OP. No.1 Bank.  The CC deposited Rs.20,00,000/- on 29.11.2005 in her above mentioned  account with the OP. Bank.  The CC only withdrew Rs.1,00,000/- from above mentioned account and  never  withdrew the remaining amount from her above said account . In the month of April 2017 the CC obtained information regarding her above said amount deposited in her above mentioned account with the OPs Bank and the amount of the CC was not lying deposited in her above mentioned  account with the OP Bank.  The CC never withdrew any amount from her above mentioned account with the OP Bank  nor signed or thumb marked any voucher for transfer of amount  from her above  mentioned account nor the  CC ever gave her consent to transfer/withdraw the above mentioned amount from her above mentioned account with the OP Bank.  Despite so many requests the OP no.1 remained putting off the matter on one pretext or the other and  ultimately in the last week of September 2017, the OP no.1 totally refused to give any information to the CC. There is a fault on the part of the OPs  as the OPs has deducted the above said amount from  her account without the consent of the CC. The CC through her counsel also sent the Legal notice dated  3.10.2017 demanding the above said amount  from the OPs. The Ops gave a vague reply to the above said notice and the  CC was not satisfied with the said reply. The CC again got issued another legal notice dated 11.11.2017 to the OPs through her counsel. In reply to the notice, the OP. no.1 stated that the amount of  RS.15,00,000/- was transferred by the OP no.1 from the above mentioned account of the CC  in the saving account  of  OP no.2 on 30.11.2005. The OP no.1 illegally transferred the amount in the saving account of opposite party no.2, in collusion with the OP no.2 without the consent of the CC, which   amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence , this complaint is for  giving  directions to the OPs to pay Rs.15,00,000/- alongwith  upto date interest  at the rate of 18% PA from 30.11.2005 till the final realization of the amount to the CC and to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation/damages for mental agony and harassment.

 

3.                        Notice of complaint was given to the OPs, they appeared and OP no.1, filed its written reply/version  raising preliminary objections, that the present complaint is not maintainable, the present  complaint is time barred. It is further alleged on the merit that CC opened saving account  on 29.11.2005 and deposited of Rs.20,00,000 in the above mentioned saving account.  The  account in question  had been operated by the CC and had made the transactions as per the procedure established and withdrawn  the amount herself from her account and the voucher of withdrawal bears the thumb impression of the complainant, whereby  the amount has been withdrawn by the CC herself. The thumb impressions on the concerned voucher had been got compared from the document and finger print expert Dr. Inderjit Singh , who had vide his report dated 11.5.2017 given opinion that the disputed thumb impressions marked tally with standard thumb impression of Kulwant Kaur, they are of one and the same person.   The matter was inquired by the bank through Kulwant Singh Manager, Head Office, Sirhind and vide his report he has submitted that the CC had a saving account bearing no.5056 in the OP Bank and on  27.11.2005 an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- were deposited by the CC. The inquiry officer  had reported that he made inquiry on 18.4.2017 and during his inquiry the account holder  requested to get compared the signatures of the transfer vouchers of dated 30.11.2005 regarding transfer of Rs.15,00,000/- and regarding the thumb impressions appended on the loose cheque  dated 5.12.2005 relating  to withdrawal of Rs.4,00,000/-.  Vided letter no.515 dated 6.5.2017 Dr. Inderjit Singh was allowed access to the original record as per the procedure and Dr.Inderjit Singh vide his report dated 11.5.2017 had given his report that the thumb impressions of complainant bearing on the cheques and the transfer voucher are the same as her standard thumb impressions and he has given report that the standard thumb impression and disputed thumb impressions are of the one and same person.  The CC had also moved a complaint dated 27.6.2014 before the SSP, Fatehgarh Sahib and the police had  found the  complaint of the CC to be false. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP no.1. Accordingly, OP. no.1  prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4.                                   The complaint has been contested by OP no.2 ,who filed  written reply, raising preliminary objections, that the present complaint is not maintainable, the present  complaint is time barred and this  Consumer Commission has  no jurisdiction to try the present complaint.  It is alleged that the CC with her own sweet will has operated her above said account  and without any pressure transferred/withdrawn the amount from the  Bank .. The CC with her own sweet will, without any pressure given/transferred an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- from her account to the account of OP. no.2. On the complaint of CC, the OP no.1 got compared the thumb impression of the CC from the document expert by adopting proper process and thumb impression of the CC found correct . The CC was residing with  OP no.2 and OP no.2 taking care of his mother being his son in a nice manner and providing her all amenities of life  as the father of the OP no.2 already expired. The CC due to love and affection transferred the above said amount with her sweat will from her account  in the account of OP no.2 by way of oral gift. Accordingly, OP. no.2  prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

5.                                The complaint has been contested by OP no.7 ,who filed  written reply, raising  preliminary objections, that the present complaint is not maintainable, the present  complaint is time barred and this  Consumer Commission has  no jurisdiction to try the present complaint.  It is alleged that the CC with her own sweet will has operated her above said account  and without any pressure transferred/withdrawn the amount from the  Bank with her own sweet will . The CC with her own sweet will has operated her above said account and  without any pressure given/transferred the amount from the Bank. The above said amount given by the  CC with her sweet will to the OP no.2 The OP no.1 got compared the thumb impression of the CC from the document expert by adopting proper process and thumb impression of the CC found correct . The CC was residing with  OP no.2 and OP no.2 taking care of his mother being his son in a nice manner and providing her all amenities of life  as the father of the OP no.2 already expired. The CC due to love and affection transferred the above said amount with her sweat will from her account  in the account of OP no.2 by way of oral gift. Accordingly, OP. no.7  prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

6.                     On dated 4.2.2021 the OPs no. 3 to 6 have stated that they adopt the written version filed by OP no.1 and does not want to file any other  version .

7.                          The CC in support of his complaint tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1 along with  documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C12 In rebuttal the OP. no.1 has tendered in evidence  affidavit of Jaspal Singh, Ex.OP1/A, along with documents Ex.OP1/1 toEx.OP1/15.  In rebuttal  the OPs no.3 to 6 have  tendered in evidence affidavit of  Kulwant Singh Manager Retd. (Inquiry officer) Ex.OP3/1.  No evidence given by the Ops no.2 and 7. At the later stage they did not appear and   were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 4.2.2021.

 

5.                  We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record.

6.                          The CC filed the present complaint alleging that she opened saving account no.5056 on dated 9.12.2000 in the OP no.1 Bank. The CC deposited Rs.20,00,000/- on 29.11.2005 in her above mentioned account  with the OP  no.1 Bank after selling her share of agricultural land.   Thereafter, CC withdrew  Rs1,00,000/- from  her account and  never  withdrew any other amount from above said account.  But in the month of April 2017 , she got information   that  the OP no.1 had transferred the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- in the account of her  son i.e. OP no.2. She also alleged that she neither  signed nor marked thumb impression  on voucher to transfer the amount from her above said account nor the  CC gave her consent  to withdraw the above mentioned amount from her above said account with the OP no.1 bank. She also alleged that the amount was transferred in the account of OP no.2 by the OP no.1 in collusion with OP no.2 without consent of the CC.

7.                The OP no.1 has admitted that  Rs.20,00,000/- was deposited by the CC on 29.11.2005 in the above said account. It has been further alleged that the account  was operated  by CC herself and made  the transactions  as per the procedure established and had withdrawn the amount herself by signing and thumb marked the voucher and  an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was transferred by herself in the account of OP no.2 and  also withdrew the amount of Rs.4,00,000/-  on  5.12.2005.  It is also alleged by the Op  no.1  that the matter was inquired. The thumb impressions  and signatures were got compared  from  Finger  Print  Expert Dr. Inderjit Singh , who submitted his report dated 11.5.2017 that the thumb impression  of CC bearing on the cheques  and the transfer voucher  are same  and the standard thumb impression  and disputed thumb impressions are of the one and same person.  It is also alleged that the CC also moved a complaint  dated 27.6.2014 before the SSP, Fatehgarh Sahib but the complaint was  found false. The amount was transferred by the CC in the account  of opposite party no.2  as  per  her own sweet will. The OP no.2 has also stated that the amount of  Rs.15,00,000/- was transferred by the CC in his account by  putting  her thumb impression  and signature  on transfer voucher.  OP no.7.  who is daughter in Law  of the CC has also stated that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was transferred by CC herself  in the account of OP no.2.

8.                Ld. counsel for the CC contented that on 29.11.2005 the account  was got opened with the OP no.1 bank  and Rs.20,00,000/- were deposited and the Bank employees in collusion with the OP no.2  got signature and thumb impression of complainant on the transfer voucher fraudulently  and transferred the amount of Rs.15,00,000/-  in the account of OP no.2.  Ld. counsel for the opposite  parties contented that  the  CC has alleged a fraud in the present complaint so the present  Commission has no jurisdiction  to decide  the question of Fraud in present  complaint.  We also  found that the  complainant has alleged that Fraud was committed by the OP no.1 in collusion with the OP no.2.  It is also alleged by the   CC that  she never  signed or thumb marked any voucher  for the transfer of the amount of Rs.15,00,000/-  to the account of OP no.2 and it has been also alleged that thumb impression  and signature  of CC were obtained  on transfer voucher by  the employees of OP no.1 fraudulently. Accordingly we find that  the question of fraud  and  misrepresentation  should be  decided by the  Competent civil court or a court having  criminal  jurisdiction  after taking the evidence of both the parties  and after giving  the opportunities  to the parties to cross examine  the parties. In the present complaint  the matter relating to fraud can not be decided  by this Commission  as the proceedings in Consumer Commission are summary in nature.  As such this  Commission is not empowered to adjudicate the allegation of Fraud.  Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redress Commission in case title as  MARRY KUTTY SAMUEL  Vs  CHIEF MANAGER, ICICI PRUDENTIAK LIFE INSURANCE CO. Ltd  has observed  that the Consumer Fora  is not empowered  to adjudicate the allegation of Fraud.  The Hon’ble  National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi has observed that   in case  titled as  Capital Charitable  & Education   Vs Axis Bank Limited that the cases related to Fraud/Forgery  can not be decided by  a Consumer Fora, proceedings before which, are summary in nature.  The complaint is also beyond limitation  as the alleged fraud was committed  by OPs  no.1 and 2  on 29.11.2005 and 30.11.2005. The present complaint was filed on  5.3.2018 after the period of more then  12 years. The  CC has alleged that  in the month of April 2017 she got information that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- has been transferred in the account of OP no.2 but this  fact alleged by the  CC is  proved false as the CC herself  admitted that she withdrew  Rs.1, 00,000/- from  her account and the OPs produced original  voucher  as Ex.OP1/5, which shows that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-  was withdrawn by the CC on 13.12.2005 i.e after 30 days of transfer of Rs.15,00,000/- from her account to the account of OP no.2.  However the OPs  have also produced a voucher  dated 5.12.2005 vide which the CC withdrew  an amount of Rs.4,00,0000/-/- herself  after  5 days of transfer of 15,00,0000/-. So  it cannot be believed  that  the Complainant  had no knowledge till April 2017.  The CC has failed to produce any evidence except her own  affidavit alleging that  the amount was transferred by the OP no.1 in  collusion with the OP no.2.

  9.                         In view of  aforesaid discussion  the complaint deserves dismissal and  hence  is dismissed. Free certified copies of the order be supplied to the complainant and the OPs as per rules.  File be indexed and consigned to record room.

 

 

Announced

December 02, 2021

                                                     (Pushvinder Singh)

                                                                          President

                                                       

  

 

                                                                 (Manjit Singh Bhinder)

Member