NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/700/2010

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR. - Complainant(s)

Versus

MOHAMMAD ZAKI - Opp.Party(s)

MR. R.K. DHAWAN

19 Mar 2010

ORDER

Date of Filing: 08 Feb 2010

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. No. RP/700/2010
(Against the Order dated 06/11/2009 in Appeal No. 207/2009 of the State Commission Jharkhand)
1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ANR.Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Main Market, DaltonganjPalamau2. REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, PUNJAB NATIIONAL BANKBagroy Building, Main Road, If Front of Rospa Tower, Behind Raj HospitalRanchi ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. MOHAMMAD ZAKIR/o. Noori Masjid Road, Mohalla Pahari, Post Office/P.S. DaltongajPalamau ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN ,PRESIDENTHON'BLE MR. S.K. NAIK ,MEMBER
For the Appellant :MR. R.K. DHAWAN
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 19 Mar 2010
ORDER

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.

Respondent/complainant had an Account with the respondent in which nearly Rs.50,000/- were lying deposited.  On 07.4.1997, he withdrew Rs.30,000/- from the Account leaving behind             Rs.19,759.40 paise.  After 10 years, i.e. on 04.12.2007 the respondent sought to withdraw the balance amount of Rs.19,759.40 paise but the same was not paid, aggrieved against which the respondent filed complaint before the District Forum.

 

-2-

District Forum directed the petitioner bank to refund Rs.19,759.40 paise to the respondent along with interest @ 6% p.a. from 07.4.1997 till realization.  Rs.2,000/- were awarded towards mental agony and Rs.500/- as costs.

Petitioner being aggrieved filed an appeal before the State Commission which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the bank cannot refuse to pay the money due in its possession in Saving Bank Account if it has not been withdrawn for a long period.  Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that only Rs.471/- were lying deposited and it be presumed that the respondent must have withdrawn the balance amount.  The onus was on the petitioner to show that the respondent had withdrawn the amount which it has failed to discharge by producing some evidence to show that the respondent, in fact, had withdrawn the money.  Dismissed.  No costs.        

 



......................JASHOK BHANPRESIDENT
......................S.K. NAIKMEMBER