Delhi

West Delhi

CC/08/117

DAKSH EXIM SOLUTIONS - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI BANK - Opp.Party(s)

10 Sep 2018

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

150-151; COMMUNINTY CENTER ; C-BLOCK; JANAK PURI; NEW DELHI

CASE NO. 117/08

Daskh  Exim  Solutions(P) Ltd.   R/o B-57, Jeevan Niketan ,     (2^nd Floor ), New Delhi-110063                                     …….. Complainant

VERSUS

ICICI Bank Ltd.   Paschim Vihar Branch,    B-368, Meera Bagh,  Paschim Vihar, New Delhi-110063 (Through its Manager)                                                …..Opposite  Parties

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant is a Private Limited Company  registered under  Companies Act, 1956 and  commenced  its operation   in  January,   2006 the complaint  is being  filed  through  the Director  of the  company  Shri Chander Pahwa , who is duly authorized by Board Resolution  dated 21.03.2006.  The complainant was attracted by some publicity of OP company and being personally contacted   by one of its agent  who assured   of prompt and efficient  service.  The complainant  opened  its first  account  for commencement of its operations with OP on 28.01.2006 being  C.A. bearing  A/C   No.  028805001126 at  the  time  of   opening the account . 

 

The complainant deposited  a cheque   dated  28.01.2006 that  a sum of Rs. 11,000/-  drawn  on the OP  Bank’s  Punjabi Bagh  Branch in favour of Complainant  which should have been credited in the account of complainant on the same date i.e. 28.01.2006.

It has been further averred  in the complaint that for the  purpose  of initiating its working  the complainant purchased some computer related  articles  and also availed other services from  M/s  Abode  Infotech  and issued the very first  cheque  NO. 000876 dated  01.02.2006 in favour of the aforesaid  concern  for sum of Rs. 7,500/- .  However the said cheque  was returned  by OP  unpaid with remarks “INSUFFICIENT FUNDS”  despite  the fact the complainant was having sufficient  balance  in its  account  and  dishonor of cheque on account of insufficient  has caused damage to the  reputation  of the complainant  and further also caused mental agony to the CEO of complainant company.  Therefore, the complainant filed the present complaint seeking  compensation  of Rs. 75,000/-  for loss , mental agony and Litigation expense to the tune of Rs. 2,600/- . 

OP filed  reply  taking preliminary  objection inter-alia  that the complaint was not maintainable  as the complainant was  not a consumer as defined  under  Section 2(1)(d)  of Consumer  Protection Act also and that  the collection branch   had been shifted  to Rohini and  as such  no cause of action had arisen  within the jurisdiction of this Forum.  It has been further stated  in reply that cheque No. 126919  dated  28.01.2006 for Rs. 11,000/-  presented by complainant on 28.01.2006.  The account  of the complainant 

 

was activated on 28.01.2006.  The next date that is 29.01.2006 was  Sunday  the Banks were closed.  The cheque  in question being  an account opening  cheque  remained  with company official which was deposited on 31.01.2006  and the amount was credited into the newly opened account of complainant on 03.02.2006.   As such there any deficiency on the part of OPs the complaint being false and frivolous   should be rejected. 

3.     Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence testifying all the facts stated in the complaint. On the other hand Sh.  Sanjay Sharma Assistant Manager(Legal) filed his affidavit in evidence on behalf of O.P.   Written submissions have also been filed by both the parties.

4.     We have heard Counsel for parties and perused the record. Counsel for Complaint advanced oral arguments.  Before going  into the merits of the case It is  appropriate to first   rule out  as to whether   complainant is a consumer  with the  meaning of Section 2(1)(d)  of Consumer  Protection Act.  The OP has taken a specific objection in the reply   that the complainant   is not   a consumer as defined under Consumer Protection Act.  Admittedly the complainant is a business entity   and claimed to be  a private limited company registered  under  the  Companies Act.  It has also been stated in the complaint and the complainant is running a commercial activity and the company account in question has been also operated to facilitate the business transactions being carried out by the complainant.  The company account bearing No.  028805001126 opened  by OP  was commercial account. Now the question arisen as to whether  the business  entity carrying on business activity with commercial bank account

can be said  to be  consumer within meaning of    Section 2(1)(d)  of Consumer  Protection Act, the answer is in the negative.

LUMONIE TRANSPORT ORGANISATION Vs CHARN  SPINNIG MILLS (P) LTD.  & OTHRS I (2010 CPJ 4 (SC)

The Supreme Court laid down that where services were availed for commercial  purpose that person availing the  service will not be a consumer. 

SUSHMA  GOEL VS PNB , II(2011) CPJ 270(NC) 

NC held that if complaint related to cooperation of bank account maintained by commercial organization for commercial purpose in that case the complainant will not  be a consumer.

IN SUBHASH MOTILAL SHAH(HUF) & OTHERS Vs  MALEGAON MERCHANTS CO-OP. BANK LTD I(2013 CPJ 3 & 4 (NIC) (CA) .

The petitioner ‘HUF’ had opened a current account to be used for commercial purpose .

The National Commission  held that   it was  not a ‘consumer vide  its order dated 12.02.2013 and the SLP  filed against  the said order , was  dismissed by the Apex Court in  Civil Appeal No. 39200/2013, dated 13.01.2014.

        In the instant case the bank account was opened in the name of  Private Ltd.  Company which was registered under Companies Act, 1956.  The commercial bank account  was being utilized by the complainant for commercial activities, therefore, in view of law point  discussed  above the complaint is dismissed.

           Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules.

   File be consigned to the record room. 

  Announced this___ ___ day of     September    2018.

 

                                                                                                                       ( K.S. MOHI )                                                    (PUNEET LAMBA)                    

                                                                                                                          PRESIDENT                                                              MEMBER