Delhi

New Delhi

CC/817/2006

Vijay Laxmi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Punjab National Bank & Ors. - Opp.Party(s)

28 May 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/817/06                            Dated:

In the matter of:

1. Smt. Vijay Laxmi

        W/o Sh. Kartar Kishan,

        (Since deceased)

        Through LRs

1. Ms. Geetanjali (Daughter)
2. Hemant Kumar (Son)
3. Prabhat Kumar (Son)

2. Sh. Kartar Kishan

S/o Sh. Jai Kishan

All R/o L-88/2, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi-62

……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

1. Branch Manager,

        Punjab National Bank,

        Khanpur Branch, New Delhi-110062

 

2. Regional Manager,

        Zonal Office, Punjab National Bank,

        Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi

                        ……..OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ORDER

President:  C.K Chaturvedi

The complaint was filed by Smt. Vijay Laxmi (Since deceased) and represented by LRs, her husband, against OP bank, for negligence and deficiency of debit Rs.7,000/- and Rs.30,000/- from their joint account no.3c720 ( saving bank account) with OP. It is alleged that said amounts were withdrawn on 23.08.04 by two cheques no.105341 for Rs.7,000/- and cheque no.105342 for Rs.30,000/-. The bank had not issued any cheque book to complainant, having such no. of cheques. He reported to the Branch Manager on 14.09.04. A police report was also lodged by the bank and the used cheques were given to police on 11.02.05. A handwriting expert also examined this specimen and dispute signatures. His report is on record. He opined that disputed signatures on cheques used for withdrawal and specimen signatures in Bank and requisition for bank cheque book did not match and disputed signatures were forged.

 The OP in reply has not denied the fact that the cheque book containing cheques used for withdrawing money was not issued to complainant. It only alleged that complainants themselves withdraw the money. We have considered the matter summarily, perused the evidence with submissions.

In our view, once OP is not able to challenge the use of cheques not issued to complainants, and handwriting report is unrebutted, the finger of suppression goes to person working in the bank. The police investigation may or may not bring out the actual offender, but loss to complainants, at the ends of the bank, due to negligence of its staff is proved.

 We hold OP deficient and imperfect in services, and direct OP to return Rs.37,000/- to LRs of Vijay Laxmi, brought on record by application of husband Kartar Kishan on record. The bank will pay interest at the rate of 9% from date of withdrawal till payment. We also award a compensation of Rs.30,000/- for deficiency and Rs.30,000/- for litigation expenses since 2006.

        The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

 

Pronounced in open Court on 28.05.2015.

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)                 (Ritu Garodia)

MEMBER                                  MEMBER