Haryana

Ambala

CC/239/2017

Karamjit Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank - Opp.Party(s)

B.S. Jaspal

04 Apr 2018

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                           Complaint No. 239 of 2017.

   Date of Institution: 13.07.2017.

   Date of final order: 04.04.2018.

 

Karamjit Kaur d/o Sh.Ujjagar Singh resident of House No.820, Sector 9, Ambala City (age 42 years).

                                                                 .….Complainant.

                                       Versus

ICICI Bank, SCF-4 Vikas Vihar, Ambala City through its Branch Manager.

                                                                …..Opposite party.

                          Complaint under section 12 of

Before: Sh.Dina Nath Arora, President.

    Mrs.Anamika Gupta, Member.

            Sh.Pushpender Kumar, Member.   

 

Present:   Sh. B.S.Jaspal, Adv. for complainant.

               Sh. A.K.Kaushik, Adv. for opposite party.

                             

ORDER

 

             Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is having saving account No.04XXXXXX8823 with OP but the said account has been freezed by the bank on the pretext that her son had taken some travel card and bank had inadvertently CAD $ 43808.62 credited in the travel card instead of CAD $856 and the same has been withdrawn by the card holder. The complainant is having no concern or connection with the alleged travel card and the transaction. She is having pain in her left knee and the doctor has advised surgery but due to freezing of account the complainant has failed to get the operation done. The act and conduct of the OP clearly amounts to deficiency in service. In evidence, the complainant has tendered her affidavit Annexure CW1/A and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C3.

2.             On notice OP appeared and filed its reply wherein several preliminary objections such as cause of action, maintainability, estoppal and locus standi have been taken. It has been submitted that the OP bank is custodian of public money and the complainant in connivance with her son Sachjot Singh Pasricha had committed criminal breach of trust and has grabbed the excess CAD $ 42952.62 amounting to INR 2106432.52  which the complainant and her son has no right to retain it. The bank has already got lodged an FIR No.139 dated 16.05.2017 under Section 406/420 IPC against the complainant and her son in police station Baldev Nagar. At the time of processing of travel card amount an error occurred within the bank and instead of crediting of CAD $ 856 in travel card No.4065 8300 0312 6376 erroneously credited CAD $ 43808.62 in this way the bank has mistakenly credited CAD $ 42952.62 as surplus CAD$. The intention of complainant and her son become dishonest and son of the complainant had withdrawn the entire amount and transfer Rs.1145501.25 in SB account No.049801518823 on 13.01.2017, 25.01.2017, 14.02.2017 and 27.02.2017. Other contentions have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence the OP has tendered affidavit Annexure RA and documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R17.

3.             We have heard learned counsel of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file.

4.             In the present case the Op has come with the plea that the complainant and her son had illegally retained the excess CAD $ 42952.62 amounting to INR 2106432.52 and regarding this criminal as well as civil litigation for recovery of the amount from the complainant and her son which is still pending against them and has not attained finality, therefore, this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide and try the present complaint.

                The complainant though has come with the plea that she is having separate account and has no concern with the transactions of her son because he was using another account and even he has no concern with the Travel Card issued by the OP/bank but this plea is not appears to be plausible rather it appears to be an afterthought efforts to create obstacle in the proceedings initiated by the OP/bank for recovery of the public money because  the OP/bank has specifically mentioned in the reply that part amount of the alleged excess CAD $ 42952.62 amounting to INR 2106432.52 has been deposited in the account of the complainant, therefore, her account has rightly been freezed. It is worthwhile to mention here that the OP/bank is custodian of public money and therefore, it has taken every step to get the money retained by the complainant and her son inconnivance with each other and the litigation has not been finalized, therefore, we are of the view that the present complaint cannot be decided in summarily manner and it requires elaborating evidence. Moreover, the complainant can raise this plea qua freezing of her account by the OP/bank before the Civil Court where the matter is under subjudice as the present civil suit is at initial stage.

 

 

 6.               Hence, in view of above discussed factual position we  dispose of the present complaint leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned after due compliance.

 

Announced on: 04.04.2018

 

                                                                (D.N.Arora)

(Pushpender Kumar)  (Anamika Gupta       )       President,

Member              Member                 District Consumer Disputes                                                               Redressal Forum, Ambala