Bihar

StateCommission

RP/17/2015

Punjab National Bank & Ors - Complainant(s)

Versus

Kamta Prasad Singh - Opp.Party(s)

Adv. Raj Nandan Prasad

07 Sep 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
BIHAR, PATNA
FINAL ORDER
 
Revision Petition No. RP/17/2015
(Arisen out of Order Dated 27/07/2015 in Case No. CC/88/2013 of District Bhojpur)
 
1. Punjab National Bank & Ors
Punjab National Bank through its Regional Manager, East Ramna Road, PS- Ara Town, Ara, Dist- Bhojpur
Bhojpur
Bihar
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Kamta Prasad Singh
Kamta Prasad Singh, son of Sidhnath Singh, resident of Village- Dihra, PO- Baagi, PS- Azimabad, Dist- Bhojpur
Bhojpur
Bihar
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shailesh Kumar Sinha PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Upendra Jha MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. Renu Sinha MEMBER
 
For the Petitioner:
For the Respondent:
Dated : 07 Sep 2016
Final Order / Judgement

ORDER

Date of Order:      07-09-2016

S.K. SINHA, PRESIDENT

 

  1. Petitioner challenges the impugned order rejecting the objection of the petitioner that since the previous Complaint Case no. 07/03 was dismissed and the order ultimately dismissed by the Hon’ble National Commission on merit as per order dated 05.08.09 in Revision petition no. 3318 of 2004 the filing of present complaint case no. 88 of 13 could not be maintained since gets part on the wider principal of res-judicata. It is submitted that complainant admittedly filed the previous complaint case no. 07/03 for the same subject which was dismissed by the District Forum, affirmed by the State Commission and lastly the revision petition filed by the complaint before the Hon’ble National Commission was dismissed as mentioned above. On behalf of opposite party (complainant) it is submitted that the previous complaint case was although for the same subject matter but the complaint was not finally decided by the Forum on merit and as such the same could not be barred on the principle of res-judicata.

  2. The District Forum considering the case of both the parties held the complaint maintainable observing that the previous complaint was dismissed since the complainant alleges fraudulent transactions/withdrawal of the money from the account and also on the point that a criminal case with respect to the matter was pending. The criminal case in acquittal of the complainant and as such it was held that the previous complaint was not heard and finally decided on merit, but was dismissed on account of pendency of the criminal case and since the criminal case ended in acquittal, the filing of the present case is permissible in law.

  3. We have considered the submissions of the parties and the impugned order as also the order dated 20.05.2003 passed by the District Forum in Complaint Case No. 235/03 filed by the complainant and 236/03 filed by the O.P (Complainant) as also the order 05.08.09 passed by the Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No. 3318/04 filed by the O.P (Complainant) against the order dismissing the appeals filed by the complainant.

  4. We have considered the aforesaid order where it would appear that the complainant’s case alleging deficiency in service on the part of the bank in allowing the withdrawal from the account without any reason made known to the complainant as such filed the complaint which was dismissed on consideration that the complainant was a guarantor of different persons who had obtained Kissan Credit Card and several persons have given in writing to the bank that the complainant is doing the business of middle man and has withdrawn a good amount from the bank in the name of different persons for which a criminal case was filed. The Complaint was dismissed. The order was assailed before the State Commission. The State Commission upon considering the documents on the record having found that the bank has rightly refused to the complainant any further withdrawal of the amount since the fact that complainant in connivance with several persons including the bank employees for withdrawal from the account on the basis of Kissan Credit Card which revealed from the inquiry conducted by the bank. The revision petition filed by the complainant before the Hon’ble National Commission upon considering the orders passed by the District Forum and the State Commission accordingly dismissed the revision filed by the complainant vide order dated 05.08.09 as contained in Annexure-3 to the memo of appeal. On conjoint perusal of the aforesaid order passed in the previous complaint case and subsequently affirmed in appeal and revision admittedly between the same party and the same subject matter gives no cause to file a second complaint even if complainant gets acquitted for want of evidence.

  5. For the reasons and discussions above the impugned order under revision cannot be sustained in law. It s thus set aside. The complaint No. 88/03 is dismissed. The revision stands allowed.

 

 

            

             Renu Sinha                             Upendra Jha                             S.K. Sinha

             Member(F)                              Member(M)                            President

          

Ahmad                                                                                                                                                

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Shailesh Kumar Sinha]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Upendra Jha]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Renu Sinha]
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.