West Bengal

Howrah

CC/14/2024

SAMIRAN NANDI, - Complainant(s)

Versus

CEO & MD of Indian Bank, - Opp.Party(s)

05 Feb 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HOWRAH
20, Round Tank Lane, P.O. and P.S. Howrah, Dist. Howrah-711 101.
Office (033) 2638 0892, 0512 Confonet (033) 2638 0512 Fax (033) 2638 0892
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/2024
( Date of Filing : 29 Jan 2024 )
 
1. SAMIRAN NANDI,
Kumar Nandi, vill and P.O. Abhoynagar, Nischinda Bally, Howrah 711 205
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. CEO & MD of Indian Bank,
PB-1384, 66 Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001 Tamil Nadu, India
2. The Branch Manager, of Indian Bank,
Belanagar Branch, Belanagar, Nischinda, Bally, Howrah 711 205
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Debasish Bandyopadhyay PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Dhiraj Kumar Dey MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Minakshi Chakraborty MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 05 Feb 2024
Final Order / Judgement

Order No:  2                                                                                      Date:05/02/2024

Today is fixed for admission hearing. Complainant side is found present and ready. Heard and considered submission.

Perused the complaint petition and its connected documents.

On close examination of the complaint petition and its annexed documents it appears that complainant is relying on the statement on account (Xerox copies) which are neither authenticated by the bank authority not containing the signature of the Bank Official. Moreso on close compares of the complaint petition and the Bank Statement this District Commission finds that the fact highlighted in the complaint petition is not matching with the statement of account. Moreover, the complainant has failed to produce any document to show that he highlighted his grievance before the Bank Authority by filing Written Complaint. From the documents filed it is revealed that the complainant has taken business loan for the purpose his business and so it is reflected that the complainant has taken the loan for commercial purpose. This matter is clearly reflecting that the complainant is not a consumer.

All these factors are clearly indicating that the complainant has failed to establish his case by placing cogent and reliable documents and so this District Commission has no other alternative but to dismiss this case. In the result,

 it is accordingly

o r d e r e d

that this complaint case be and same is not admitted and so it is dismissed. No order is passed as to cost.

Dictated & corrected by me.

 

President

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Debasish Bandyopadhyay]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dhiraj Kumar Dey]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Minakshi Chakraborty]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.