O R D E R
Subhash Gupta, Member
The present complaint has been filed by the Complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Act’ against the Opposite Parties, hereinafter to be referred as OPs. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant was having saving bank account No.0991000100317494 in the Punjab National Bank Branch, Mall Road, Delhi. It is further pleaded in the complaint that on 14.12.2012, during her visit to the Bank for updating her pass-book she found that a sum of Rs.22,000/- and Rs.17,000/- have been withdrawn from her account on 3.11.2012 and 16.11.2012 respectively. It is alleged in the complaint that she never visited the Bank on the dates mentioned above for withdrawal of the amount. It has been alleged that someone by forging her signature or otherwise in connivance with the staff of the Bank first stopped payment on 3.11.2012 and thereafter by signing withdrawal voucher withdrew the above said amount. It has been further alleged that complainant obtained the copies of the withdrawal forms used for withdrawal of the amounts which showed that these were not her signatures and is apparent or clear to any naked eye. It has been also alleged that efforts made by her vide complaints and reminders did not resolve the issue, therefore, the present complaint has been filed by the complainant claiming refund of Rs.39,000/- with interest and Rs.20,000/- as harassment and damages etc.
2. The Notice of the complaint was issued to the OPs but as none appeared on 7.1.2015, therefore OPs were proceeded ex-parte.
3. The complainant has filed her affidavit in support of the complaint testifying the averments raised therein. The complainant has also filed copies of the letters addressed to the OPs and copy of RTI Application. The complainant has also filed photocopy of withdrawal forms involved in this case. She has also filed her statement of account which shows withdrawal of Rs.22,000/- and Rs.17,000/- on 3.11.2012 and 16.11.2012 respectively. Statement also shows that withdrawal were made ‘by self ‘.
4. We have carefully gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on the file, the most important and basic documents which go to the root of the case are the withdrawal forms which we have carefully examined. We are of the considered view that the signatures on the complaint, affidavit of evidence and letter to the bank bearing signatures of the complainant are the admitted documents and if these admitted documents are compared with the disputed documents, such as withdrawal forms, it will lead us to only one conclusion that the signatures of the complainant on both the documents are similar. The complainant has not placed any documentary evidence or any handwriting expert report/opinion to prove that the signatures on the withdrawal forms were either forged or were not of the complainant. The Bank is not expected to doubt the signature unnecessarily and check them minutely. Bank officials are not handwriting experts.
4. It is settled law that where there are allegations for forgery, fraud and cheating adjudication whereof requires elaborate evidence, analysis of documents, examination and cross examination of the witnesses, the same cannot be decided by a Consumer Fora, proceedings before which are summary in nature. Reliance is placed on Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Munimahesh Patel, 2006(2) CPC 668 (SC). Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 1 (1998) CPJ 13 and M/s Singhal Swaroop Ispat Ltd. Vs. United Commercial Bank III (1992) CPJ 50.
5. In view of discussions made above we find that there is no deficiency in services on the part of OPs. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed, with liberty to the complainant to get the issues in this complaint resolved from the Civil Court. Ordered accordingly.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced this 24th day of May, 2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
