DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANSA. Complaint No: 184/31.10.2008 Decided on : 06.05.2009 Sh.Krishan Singh Mittal S/o Sh.Jasmair Singh, Ward No.4, New Basti, Mansa. .....Complainant. VERSUS Branch Manager, Centurion Bank of Punjab, Water Works Road, Mansa, District Mansa. .....Opposite Party. Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. ..... Present: Sh. S.K.Garg, Advocate counsel for the complainant. Sh.P.K.Singla, Advocate counsel for the opposite party. Quorum: Sh.P.S.Dhanoa, President. Sh.Sarat Chander, Member. Smt.Neena Rani Gupta, Member. ORDER:- Sh.P.S.Dhanoa, President. This complaint has been filed by, Sh.Krishan Singh Mittal son of Sh.Jasmair Singh, a resident of Mansa, against Branch Manager, Centurion Bank of Punjab Limited, Mansa, under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short called the 'Act'), for award of a sum of Rs.9,000/- on account of penalty and a sum of Rs.50,000/-, on account of reduction of shares and Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental and physical harassment, and another sum of Rs.5,000/-, as costs incurred for filing the complaint. As per averments made in the complaint, the complainant is maintaining a 'Demate' bank Account with the Mansa Contd........2 : 2 : Branch of the opposite party and his I.D.No. Is 10639804. The complainant is making payment of charges for maintenance of account and on account of interest, as such, he is consumer under the opposite party qua the said account. The complainant sold shares of some companies in the market and delivered the delivery slips to the opposite party on 14.5.2008 against receipts. Similarly, he sold other shares and he delivered the another delivery slip on 19.5.2008 against receipt. The opposite party failed to ensure delivery of his shares on account of which complainant suffered financial loss to the tune of Rs.9,000/- which is paid by way of penalty. The opposite party has failed to explain till the date of filing of the instant complaint, as to why the delivery of the shares has not taken place to the buyers on behalf of the complainant, because of which he has been subjected to mental and physical harassment. Hence this complaint. 2. On being put to notice, the opposite party filed written version, resisting the complaint, by taking preliminary objections; that the complainant, is not the 'consumer' within the ambit of its definition given in the Act; that complainant, has no cause of action, and locus standi, to file the complaint; that the complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties; that the complainant, has concealed material facts, from the knowledge of this Forum and has not approached this Forum with clean hands, as such, his complaint, being false and vexatious, is liable, to be dismissed, with costs. On merits, the factum of maintenance of Demate account by the complainant is admitted, but it is submitted that as per intimation received from Bombay office of the opposite party, delivery of shares of the complainant has not taken place because his account was suspended and he failed to submit copy of PAN card, after submission of which, process has been cleared and shares of the complainant have been credited to his account. It is submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party for which complainant may be granted compensation and costs or any other amount. Contd........3 : 3 : Rest of the averments made in complaint have been denied and a prayer has been made for dismissal of the same with costs. 3. On being called upon by this Forum, to do so, the counsel for the complainant tendered his affidavit, Exhibit C-1, copy of documents Ext.C-2 to C-4 and closed the evidence. On the other hand the counsel for the opposite party tendered in evidence affidavit Ext.OP-1 of Sh.Amrinder Singh, (Personal Banker) and photocopies of documents Ext.OP-2 to OP-4 and closed evidence on their behalf. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the oral and documentary evidence, adduced on record, by them, carefully, with their kind assistance. 5. The complainant has himself argued that copy of PAN card was not demanded from him by the opposite party at the time of opening the account and there is no proof that his account was in debt because of which delay has taken place in delivery of the shares to the buyers. He has further argued that opposite party has failed to give delivery of his shares and to give any response to his application filed on 30.5.2008 because of which his broker has claimed from him a sum of Rs.9,000/- on account of penalty and he has suffered huge financial loss due to reduction of value of shares , as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party for which they are liable to pay him the amounts, as prayed for in the complaint. 6. On the other hand, the opposite party, has filed written arguments and their counsel Sh.P.K.Singla, Advocate, has reiterated them in their entirety at the time of arguments. Learned counsel has argued that the opposite party has produced on record documents showing that delivery of the shares of the complainant has not taken place as his account was in debt and he failed to produce the copy of PAN card, as such, he is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the instant complaint. Learned counsel argued that after supply of copy of PAN Card by the Contd........4 : 4 : complainant, shares have been credited to his account at the earliest. Learned counsel further argued that as per own version of the complainant transaction pertains to the year 2008, but in his affidavit, he has stated that he filed application dated 30.10.2006 whereas his application is dated 30.5.2008, as such, plea of the opposite party is established that he has not approached the Forum with clean hands. Learned counsel further argued that there is no proof of imposition of penalty in the sum of Rs.9,000/- or financial loss suffered by him due to reduction of value of the shares in the market after they were sold by him, as such, he is not entitled to the claim of payment of any amount on that score. Learned counsel argued that there is no deficiency in service and delay has taken place because of negligence on the part of the complainant in maintaining of debit in his account and for want of copy of PAN card, as such, complaint deserves dismissal, being false and vexatious. 7. Admittedly, complainant is maintaining Demate account with the opposite party in its branch at Mansa for running his share business. It is also not disputed by the opposite party that he gave delivery slips on 14.5.2008 and 19.5.2008 to them for delivery of shares of different companies to the buyers. The plea of the opposite party is that shares of the complainant could not delivered for want of submission of copy of PAN Card and due to suspension of his account for want of debt. The opposite party has not disclosed the date on which complainant delivered the copy of proof of PAN Card. They have also not led any evidence to prove the said fact. In case there was any requirement of submission of PAN Card, then banker is expected to press for supply thereof at the time of opening the account. In copy of letter Ext.OP-3 received from Bombay office of the opposite party, it is not mentioned that shares of the complainant could not be delivered as per instructions to the buyer for want of submission of copy of Pan Card. It is only mentioned that his account has been suspended due to debt. We do not find, much weight, in Contd........5 : 5 : the plea of the opposite party that delay in delivery of the shares of the complainant, as per his instructions, has taken place at the destination for want of submission of copy of PAN card. The opposite party in letter Ext.OP-3 has mentioned that Demate account of the complainant is suspended for debit, but copy of statement of his account has not been produced by the opposite party to prove the said fact. The document Ext.OP-4 pertains to transfer of shares deposited in the month of July, 2008 whereas complainant has admittedly delivered the delivery slips on 14.5.2008 and 19.5.2008. As such, this document does not advance the case of the opposite party. 8. In the light of our above discussion, we are of the view that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party because of which complainant has been subjected to mental and physical harassment. The complainant has not placed reliance upon copy of any application in the complaint. Therefore, no significance can be attached to the application dated 30.10.2006 mentioned in his affidavit Ext.C-1, which apparently appears to be a typographical error as transaction pertain to 30.8.2008. However, complainant cannot be compensated for remote damages, as Consumer Fora can burden a Service Provider only for deficiency in service. Moreover, the complainant has not produced on record any document showing that he has paid a sum of Rs.9,000/- to his broker on account of penalty or to prove his plea that he suffered loss in the sum of Rs.50,000/- on account of reduction of value of the shares in the market. As per documentary evidence produced on record , opposite party has credited the shares in the account of the complainant and he has not sought any relief in the complaint for return thereof. As such, in our opinion, he is not entitled to any relief to that extent. 9. For the aforesaid reasons, we partly allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant on account of compensation for mental and physical harassment and Rs.1000/- Contd........6 : 6 : as costs for filing of the complaint. The compliance of the order be made within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 10. The copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs, as permissible, under the rules. File be indexed and consigned to record. Pronounced: 05.05.2009 Neena Rani Gupta, Sarat Chander, P.S.Dhanoa, Member. Member. President.
