Orissa

Cuttak

CC/58/2022

Samir Kumar Mohanty - Complainant(s)

Versus

Manager,Indusind Bank - Opp.Party(s)

A K Das & associates

31 Jul 2023

ORDER

                IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,CUTTACK.

C.C.No.58/2022

 

Samir Kumar Mohanty,

S/o: Hadi Bandhu Mohanty,

At:UtkalApartment,BlockNo.E/303,

P.O:Kalyani Nagar,Cuttack,Odisha-753013.                          ... Complainant.

 

          Vrs.

 

IndusInd Bank, represented by its

Manager,At:Plot No.1320,

BajarakbatiRoad,Cuttack-753001.                                    ...Opp. Party.

 

 

Present:            Sri Debasish Nayak,President.

                             Sri SibanandaMohanty,Member.

 

Date of filing:    06.04.2022

Date of Order:  31.07.2023

 

For the complainant:     Mr. A.K.Das,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P   :                  Mr. A.K.Samal,Advocate.

         

Sri Debasish Nayak,President

Case of the complainant as made out from the complaint petition in short is that he undertakes construction work under name and style “M/s. Ganapati Enterprisers” and he had opened a current account on 1.3.2014 with the O.P bank for his said firm bearing A/c. no.200005470338.  He had submitted the KYC documents as per the instructions of the O.P on 28.3.2017.  He had issued a cheque of Rs.50,000/- bearing cheque no.864864 in favour of Gray Enterprises on 7.4.2017.  But the said cheque was not realized, rather returned with a memo “refer to drawer”.  The complainant on the said day had a balance of Rs.1,00,000.95p available in his said account, but still then the cheque was dishonoured.  Again on 10.4.2017, the complainant had issued a cheque in favour of LIC of India bearing cheque no.864862 for a sum of Rs.71,493/- which was again dishonoured though there as sufficient balance in his said account by then to the tune of Rs.1,00,000.95p.  Again, he had issued another cheque in favour of LIC of India for an amount of Rs.87,388/- on that day, i.e, on 10.4.2017which was also not realized even though he had sufficient amount in his account.  The complainant had issued legal notice to the O.P and ultimately had to file this case before this Commission claiming a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- from the O.P towards compensation for his mental agony and harassment, another sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for his loss of market reputation and further a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards cost of his litigation.

             Together with his complaint petition, the complainant has filed copies of several documents in order to prove his case.

2.         The O.P has contested this case and has filed his written version wherein he has mentioned that the case of the complainant is not maintainable as there is no cause of action to file this case.  According to the O.P, the complainant has not approached with clean hands for which he had relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of S.P.Chengalvaraya Naidu Vrs. Jagannath reported in AIR 1994 Supreme Court 853.  According to the O.P, as per the guidelines of the R.B.I the complainant/consumer should have mandatorily complied the KYC but the complainant had not made full and complete compliance to the same.  He was requested to provide necessary documents and to cooperate with the field verification for completion of the KYCand till then his account was kept under freeze as per the banking policies and regulatory norms.  But immediately when such formalities were completed, the freeze was removed as per the process.  It is further averred by the O.P in his written version that inspite of being intimated about the freeze in the account, the repeated issuance of cheques by the complainant is purely a self-inflicted factor where the O.P has no role to play.  The O.P has further taken the plea that the case of the complainant is barred by limitation for which it should be dismissed.  The O.P has further relied upon a catena of decisions which are as follows:

             i) Punjab National Bank &Ors. Vrs. M/s. Sant Ram Harbans Lal 2016(2) CPR 584 (NC)wherein itis held that “Consumer Complaint cannot be maintained in respect of Current Account.”

             ii) Subash Motilal Shah (HUF) Dead through his LRs &Ors. Vrs. Malegaon Merchants Co-op. Bank Ltd., 2013(2) CPR 1 (NC)wherein it is held that “Business Bank account does not come under purview of Consumer Protection Act.”

             iii) Smt. Sushma Goel Vrs. Punjab National Bank reported in 2011(2) CPR 376 (NC) wherein it is held that “Bank account maintained by a commercial organization for a commercial purpose fall outside purview of Consumer Protection Act.”

             Thus, the O.P has prayed to dismiss the complaint petition as filed by the complainant.

             The complainant has filed his evidence affidavit, which when perused, it is noticed that the contents of his evidence affidavit is nothing but reiteration of the averments as made by him in his complaint petition.

             Similarly, the O.P has made his evidence affidavit through the Branch Manager,Gyana Deep Singh and the contents of the evidence affidavit of the said Gyana Deep Singh,Branch Manager of the O.P bank also is found to be the reiteration of the avermentsas made in the written version.

3.         Keeping in mind the averments as made in the complaint petition and the contents of the written version of the O.P, this Commission thinks it proper to settle the following issues in order to arrive at a definite conclusion here in this case.

                       i.              Whether the case of the complainant is maintainable?

ii.             Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?

iii.            Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as claimed by him?

Issue no.I.

             The O.P bank has urged through his written version that the case of the complainant as filed is barred by law of limitation.  Keeping this contention of the O.P bank in mind, while perusing the case record, it is noticed that the complainant has filed his case before this Commission on 6.4.2022 whereas his cheque for the last time was bounced by O.P bank on 10.4.2017.  The complainant has not whispered a single word as regards to such unreasonable delay in filing the complaint petition before this Commission. The reason of delay should have been properly explained by the complainant.  Moreso, as per the pertinent decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court those which are relied upon and cited by the O.P, the complainant in this case had a current account with the O.P bank for his firm M/s. Ganapati Enterprisers for business purpose.  In that way also the case of the complainant is not maintainable.  It is for this, we are constrained to hold that the case of the complainant as filed after a prolonged delay period and for a business purpose with a current account cannot be termed to be maintainable here.  Accordingly, this pertinent issue goes against the complainant.

Issues no.ii& iii.

             From the observation of first issue, no further discussion on the othertwo issues is necessary and accordingly the case of the complainant being barred by limitation is not maintainable and the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs as claimed by him.

                                                                             ORDER

             The case of the complainant is dismissed on contest against the O.P and as regards to the facts and circumstances of the case without any cost.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 31^stday of   July,2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission.          

                                                                                                                  Sri Debasish Nayak

                                                                                                                         President

                            

 

                                                                                                               Sri Sibananda Mohanty

                                                                                                                              Member