BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Consumer Complaint No. 297 of 2015.
Date of Institution: 26.10.2015.
Date of Decision: 03.01.2019.
Chhaju Ram son of Shri Chandgi Ram, resident of village Dadam, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani.
…..Complainant.
Versus
1. Haryana Khestriya Gramin Bank, Tosham, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani through its Branch Manager.
2. Krishan Yadav, the then Clerk, Haryana Khestriya Gramin Bank, Tosham, Tehsil Tosham, District Bhiwani, presently posted in Haryana Khestriya Gramin Bank, Hansi, District Hisar.
3. Haryana Khestriya Gramin Bank having its head office at Rohtak, Tehsil & District Rohtak through its Regional Manager.
…..Opposite Parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection, Act, 1986.
Before: - Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.
Hon’ble Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member.
Hon’ble Ms. Renu Chaudhary, Member.
Present: Complainant in person with Shri Pardeep Phogat, Advocate.
Shri Avinash Sardana, Advocate for the OPs.
ORDER:-
PER MANJIT SINGH NARYAL, PRESIDENT
Brief facts of the case of the complainant are that he is having a saving bank account No. 80210100054319 with the OP No. 1 bank. It is further alleged that complainant has deposited Rs.30,000/- in his account on 2.9.2011 vide receipt No.13. It is further alleged that on asking for making entry in the passbook the OP No.3 told that he is busy today and asked the complainant to get update his passbook later. It is further alleged that the complainant has got updated his passbook later on and he was surprised not finding the entry of receipt No. 13 vide which he deposited Rs.30,000/- and the amount of Rs.30,000/- was also not entered in his account. It is further alleged that on asking regarding non-entering the entry of Rs.30,000/- in the account, the OP No. 2 asked him to check the entries, but no fruitful result and the OP No.2 kept on lingering the matter on one pretext or the other. It is further alleged that the complainant keep visiting the office of OP No. 1 from October, 2011 to November, 2014, but to no effect. It is further alleged that ultimately the complainant has moved an application to OP No.1 on 13.11.2014 with the request to make the entry of Rs.30,000/- in his passbook and a copy of the same forwarded to the OP No.3, but OP No. 1 vide its reply dated 8.12.2014 told that you have deposited Rs.30,000/- on 1.9.2014 and mentioned the date on deposit slip as 2.9.2011. It is further alleged that the complainant has complained the matter before Grievances Redress & Monitoring System, Bhiwani on 2.1.2015 & 18.2.2015, who assured the complainant for forwarding the complaint in concerned office redress. It is further alleged that Grievances Redress & Monitoring System, Bhiwani replied vide letter dated 3.3.2015 that your complaint has been sent to the SSP, Bhiwani for redress the matter, but no action taken in the matter. Hence, this complaint.
2. Notice issued to the OPs and the OP No. 1 & 2 have filed their joint reply denying the allegations of the complainant. It is alleged by the OP No.1 & 2 that the complaint not maintainable against the Bank as the complaint has been filed against the Bank mentioning its name as Haryana Khestriya Gramin Bank, whereas the name of Bank is Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank w.e.f. 29.11.2013. It is further alleged that the complaint is barred by time, as the incident took place in September, 2011 and the present complaint has been filed in the year 2015. It is further alleged that the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- in his account on 1.9.2011 and the entry of the same was made in his account on the same day. It is further alleged that it appears that inadvertently the complainant mentioned the date on deposit voucher as 2.9.2011 and in fact he visiting bank on 1.9.2011. It is further alleged that a deposit slip is found sealed in vouchers having date 1.9.2011 for Rs. 30,000/- bearing Sr. No. 13, received by OP No. 2, the then cashier on dated 1.9.2011 and the said slip was entered in system by Smt. Charu Sehra, office Assistant and the same was passed by Shri Ram Niwas, Assistant Manager being authorized officer on 1.9.2011 and the entry in this regard was made by Shri Saurabh, clerk in the pass book of the complainant on 1.9.2011. It is further alleged that the counterfoil produced by the complainant is having same date i.e. 2.9.2011 & Sr. No. 13 and hand writing is part of deposit slip sealed, entered in cash book and system duly authorized on 1.9.2011. It is further alleged on the complaint of the complainant, the matter was inquired by Shri R. C. Dahiya, Senior Manager, SHGB, Regional Officer at Bhiwani and he submitted his detailed report dated 14.1.2015, whereby the complaint was found false and the complainant was duly informed vide letter dated 30.1.2015 and it was found that complainant deposited Rs.30,000/- on 1.9.2011 and not on 2.9.2011 and the same was deposited in his account on 1.9.2011 and same was entered at Sr. No. 13 on 1.9.2011 and the same serial number was mentioned on the deposit slip allegedly dated 2.9.2011. It is further alleged that during the inquiry the complainant has failed in producing deposit slip dated 1.9.2011. It is further alleged that during the inquiry the case of the 1.9.2011 and 2.9.2011 was also found correct and in order. It is further alleged that during the inquiry it was found that there were only 12 cash receipt voucher on 2.9.2011. It is further alleged that it was found in the inquiry that the complainant visit the bank time to time for updating his pass book, whereas he made the complaint regarding aforesaid transaction after passing of 3 years. It is further alleged that the complainant has deposited Rs.30,000/- on 1.9.2011 and not on 2.9.2011 and the date on the voucher was filled by him as 2.9.2011 just to extort the money illegally from the OPs and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with costs.
3. On notice OP No.3 appeared and filed the its reply denying the allegations of the complainant, on the same footings as filed by OP No.1 & 2 and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant filed the replication to the reply of the OPs and prayed for allowing the complaint with costs.
5. Ld. counsel for the complainant in support of his case placed on record receipt dated 2.9.2011 as annexure C1, copy of bank pass book as annexure-C2 & C3, copy of application dated 13.11.2014, copy of CM Grievances Redress & Monitoring System Haryana letter dated 2.1.2015, copy of application dated 18.2.2015, Copy of Status report of CM Grievances Redress & Monitoring System dated 3.3.2015 and closed the evidence.
6. Ld. counsel for the OPs in support of their version has placed on record affidavit of OP No.2 as Ex. RW1/A, affidavit of Shri R. C. Dahiya, Senior Manager as Ex. RW2/A, Affidavit of Shri R. S. Jugiani, Sr. Manager, copy of deposit voucher as Ex. R-1, copy of counter foil as Ex. R-2, copy of account statement of account No.80210100054319 as Ex. R-3, copy of application dated 15.12.2014 as Ex. R-4, copy of letter dated 2.1.2015 as Ex. R-5, copy of reply of Shri Krishan Lal Yadav dated 14.1.2015 as Ex. R-6, copy of inquiry report of Shri R. C. Dahiya dated 14.1.2015 as Ex. R-7, copy of ledger dated 2.9.2011 as Ex. R-8, copy of ledger dated 1.9.2011 as Ex. R-9, copy of letter dated 15.1.2015 as Ex. R-10, copy of letter dated 30.1.2015 as Ex. R-11 and closed the evidence.
7. We have heard the complainant and ld. counsel for the OP No. 3 at length and have gone through the case file carefully.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties at length and having gone through the material available on the record, we are of the considered view that complaint of the complainant deserves dismissal being barred by limitation, as the complainant has allegedly deposited the amount of Rs.30,000/- on 2.9.2011 and he has moved an application to the OP No. 1 only on 13.11.2014 for getting the amount entered in pass book. The complainant has miserably failed to produce any cogent and convincing evidence to prove that why he remained silent for such a long period of 3 years & 2 months. Moreover, the complainant has approached this Forum on dated 26.10.2015 i.e. after lapse of four years period. In the present case no application for condonation of delay has been filed by the complainant with the present complaint. As per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 amended upto date the limitation period for filing the complaint is of two years from the date of cause of action and in the present case the cause of action arose to the complainant on 2.9.2011. Complainant has filed the present complaint after lapse of more than 2 years time i.e. 784 days. The Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi vide its order dated 22.11.2018 in revision petition titled as Sudershan Pal Vs Supreme Mobiles Ltd., bearing RP No. 183 of 2018, has also dismissed the application for condonation of delay as well as revision petition, because the applicant has failed to show sufficient cause to condone the delay of 330 days. Therefore, in view of the facts & circumstances mentioned above, without commenting the merits of the case, the present complaint is hereby dismissed being barred by limitation with no order to cost.
Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open court.
03.01.2019.
(Renu Chaudhary) (Parmod Kumar) (Manjit Singh Naryal)
Member. Member. President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
