STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                                    U.T., CHANDIGARH 

Dr. Monika Jindal D/o Late Nasib Chand Jindal, resident of C-15/6, MSSC Hospital, Beas, District Amritsar at the time of opening account and at present residing at H.No.286, Sec.15-A, Chandigarh                                                                                                                                    …Appellant

                                                  Versus

1]       Punjab National Bank, through its Branch Manager, SCF 53, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Jalandhar City, District Jalandhar.

2]       Punjab National Bank, through its Regional Manager, Bank Square, Sector 17, Chandigarh.

3]       Punjab National Bank, Head Office, 7, Punjab National Bank House, Bhikaji Cama Place, Delhi – 110066, through its Managing Director-cum-Chairman.

4]       Anurag Shourie son of Madhusudan Shourie, resident of House No.789, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Jalandhar,Punjab.

                                                                   ……Respondents

             Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986                against  order dated 15.6.2018 passed by District Consumer                         Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U. T. Chandigarh in C.C.No.No.                          1003/2016..

Argued by:  Mr.Nikhil Kumar, Advocate for the appellant.

BEFORE:       JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

                        MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

                 Appellant/complainant has filed this appeal against order dated 15.6.2018 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’ only), dismissing her complaint bearing No.1003 of 2016. . 

2.     As per facts on record, it was grievance of the appellant/complainant against OP bank that her confidential record qua saving bank account has unauthorizedly been shown to OP No.4/respondent No.4- her husband who has filed a divorce petition against her before the Civil Court at Solan. The detail qua her salary statement was used by OP No.4 in those proceedings. It was her case that she never authorized the bank to issue copy of salary account statement to OP No.4.  By issuing that account statement, the bank has violated fiduciary relationship between the parties.   

3.          Upon notice, reply was filed by the OPs. OP No.1 to 3 in their joint written reply denied that the bank had provided her salary account statement to any unauthorized person.  It was specifically stated that upon complainant’s making an oral request, after proper identification of photograph, the said account statement was issued.  It was stated that may be on account of rivalry between the complainant and OP No.4 the  complaint was filed. It was pleaded that there was no deficiency in providing service and a prayer was made for dismissal of the complaint.

                OP No.4 specifically stated in his reply that he never got copy of the salary statement of complainant from the bank, rather during subsistence of the marriage, the complainant herself shared the above said information with him.

4.      To the separate replies filed, rejoinder was filed controverting the pleas taken in the replies and reiterating the averments made in the complaint.

5.              Both the parties led evidence. The Forum, on analysis of pleadings of the parties, documents on record, and the arguments addressed, dismissed the complaint by observing as under ;

“Sh. Balbir Singh, Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, Urban Estate Branch, Phase-I, Jalandhar in his duly sworn affidavit for and on behalf of Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, has categorically stated in para 11 that they never provided the statement of salary account to any person, other than the Complainant herself, upon her oral request and proper identification of photograph in the computer data and that too in the year 2012. In these set of circumstances, keeping in view the period in which the said statement of account was provided, we feel that the lapse on the part of the Complainant cannot be ruled out especially when there was no matrimonial dispute/ divorce proceedings pending. Pertinently, there is no reference in the entire body of the Complaint that there is some secrecy act vide which third party cannot have statement of account. It is not the case, matrimonial ties between the Complainant and her husband (Opposite Party No.4) were broken on account of decree of divorce as still they are continuing as husband and wife in the eyes of law. Thus, we find that the whole gamut of facts and circumstances leans towards the side of the Opposite Parties. The case is lame of strength and therefore, liable to be dismissed”.

6.         We have gone through the record and perused the Account Ledger Inquiry available at page 16 to 18  of the paperbook. It appears that it was issued in the year 2012 whereas divorce petition, as per averments made by the complainant, was filed by OP No.4 against her in the year 2016. May be, during subsistence of the marriage, the said account statement was got issued by the complainant herself and she shared it with her husband. Account statement also contains entries upto 4.12.2012.

We are of the opinion that the view taken by the Forum is perfectly justified. No case is made out to interfere in the order, under challenge.

 7.               For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is  dismissed, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District  Forum is upheld.  

8.            Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.

9.          The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.