View 666 Cases Against Indian Overseas Bank
Ramanayak Tiwari filed a consumer case on 29 Nov 2017 against Indian Overseas Bank in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/425/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 09 Dec 2017.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI
(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR,
VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,
NEW DELHI-110002.
Case No.CC/425/16 Dated:
In the matter of:-
Shri Ramanayak Tiwari
S/o late Sh. Brij Nath Twari,
R/o E-1-52, Sector-16,
Rohini, Delhi
…..Complainant
Versus
Indian Overseas Bank,
Parliament street,
Jeevan Deep Building,
New Delhi-110001
.…… Opposite Parties
ORDER
H.M. VYAS, MEMBER
The complainant has filed the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP bank stating that the complainant has an account with the OP through which he is getting the pension against PPO No. 771010604820 . The copy of the PPO entry of monthly pension annexed. The Deptt. of Telecommunication forwarded a letter dated 15/4/15 to the CPAO, Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of expenditure and the OP regarding the actual payment to be made to the complainant followed by another letter dated 16/3/16 to pay revised pension but the OP did not pay heed and did not disclose the correct figure to the complainant deliberately. The e-mail sent to the Centralized Pension Processing Centre (in short CPPC) was forwarded to the OP to look into the matter. The complainant again vide letter dated 30/4/16 intimated that he is getting less pension being disbursed from 1/1/06 and requested to correct the same. The OP came into action after said letter dtd 30/4/16 and forwarded the e-mail to CPPC without clarifying about the reasons of not doing the correction/payment of arrears earlier. The legal notice of the complainant was replied by the OP through communication dated 18/5/16. The complainant has not filed the details of delayed period and the amount due at relevant time. Following prayer is made :-
The OP was proceeded ex-parte on 9/3/17 after dasti service of notice. The complainant filed ex-parte evidence and also addressed oral arguments. The text of the complainant has remained un-rebutted as the OP was proceed ex-parte. We have considered the material placed before us and the arguments addressed with relevant provisions of law. . The main grievance of the complainant is that the arrears though were paid to him but after a long time. The complainant has filed copy of the reply dated 18/5/16 (Annexure C 9 with complaint) to the legal notice which is material & shows that the intimation with details of payments made was conveyed to the complainant through his advocate. The relevant para of the said letter reads as below:-
A bare perusal of the above communication dated 18/5/16 it is clear that the entire amount as due was paid by the OP to the complainant, however, there is delay in making the payments which shows the deficiency of service on the part of the OP as the amount due and payable to the complainant was not paid within reasonable time. We are therefore, of the considered view that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP and direct OP to pay Rs. 15000/- as compensation beside a sum of Rs 5000/- for harassment and as litigation cost to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order failing which interest @ 10 % on above amount shall be paid by the OP to the complainant till the date of payment.
Announced in open Forum on ______________. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in. Copy of the orders be sent to the parties by post free of cost as per statutory requirement.
File be consigned to record room.
(S K SARVARIA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.