STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW
APPEAL NO. 1817 OF 2014
(Against judgment and order dated 07-07-2014 in Complaint
Case No.114 of 2014 of the District Consumer Forum, Oraiya )
Central Bank of India
Through Branch Manager
Branch Mihouli, Post Pannhar
Pargana and District Oraiya
...Appellant
Vs.
Ram Das, S/o Sadhu Singh
Village and Post Sahabbda
Pargana and District Oraiya
...Respondent
BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT
HON’BLE MR. RAM CHARAN CHAUDHARY, MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. SANJAY KUMAR, MEMBER
For the Appellant : Mr. Zafar Aziz, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. J K Jain, Advocate.
Dated : 07-10-2017
JUDGMENT
MR. JUSTICE AKHTAR HUSAIN KHAN, PRESIDENT(ORAL)
This is an appeal filed under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against judgment and order dated 07-07-2014 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Oraiya in Complaint No. 114 of 2014 Ram Das V/s Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Sahar Etawa, District Etawa and another whereby the District Consumer Forum has allowed complaint and ordered opposite parties to pay Rs.55,000/- to complainant with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of complaint till date of actual payment.
Feeling aggrieved with judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum opposite party of the complaint has filed this appeal.
Learned Counsel Mr. Zafar Aziz appeared for appellant.
Learned Counsel Mr. J K Jain, appeared for respondent.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused impugned judgment and order as well as records.
In brief relevant facts for determination of appeal are that the respondent/complainant has filed above complaint before District Consumer
:2:
Forum wherein it has been stated that he has KCC Account No. 33 in Mihouli branch of appellant bank. On 17-01-2011 he deposited Rs.75,000/- in his said account in said branch of appellant for which three separate receipts were issued by the Branch Manager each for Rs.25,000/- but on 28-06-2012 it came to the notice of respondent/complainant that only Rs.25,000/- has been deposited in his account in bank. Rs.50,000/- deposited by him has not been shown in his account. The respondent/complainant further came to know that embezzlement has been made by Accountant of the bank. Thereafter he moved application for his deposited amount and the bank took receipt of deposit from him but did not bring Rs.50,000/- in his account. Consequently he has filed complaint.
Written statement was filed on behalf of appellant bank before District Consumer Forum wherein it was stated that there is a joint account in the name of Ramdas and Kapoori but the complaint has been filed by Ramdas only.
In written statement it has been further stated that Ganga Prasad, Cashier of the bank is under suspension and F.I.R. has been registered against him.
In written statement filed by opposite parties it has been stated that the respondent/complainant has filed complaint with false allegation. He has not filed original passbook. He has filed only depositor slip which is under investigation.
After having gone through pleadings of parties as well as evidence on record the District Consumer Forum has drawn conclusion that Rs.75,000/- has been deposited by respondent/complainant as alleged and out of which Rs.50,000/- has not been shown in his account. As such the District Consumer Forum has ordered payment of this amount and passed order as mentioned above.
Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned judgment and order is against law and evidence.
Learned Counsel for the respondent/complainant has contended that the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is in accordance with law and there is no sufficient ground for interference.
We have considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties.
:3:
After having gone through pleadings of parties as well as evidence on record we are of the view that the District Consumer Forum has rightly drawn conclusion that the respondent/complainant has proved to deposit Rs.75,000/- out of which Rs.50,000/- has not been shown in his account. As such it has rightly ordered for refund of this amount to complainant.
The cost of Rs.2,000/- awarded by District Consumer Forum appears appropriate but Rs.3,000/- awarded as compensation for mental agony against bank appears inappropriate in the circumstances of the case as the misappropriation is alleged to have been committed by an official of the bank and bank is ordered to make payment of the amount in question on the basis of vicarious liability.
In view of above appeal is allowed partially. Rs.3,000/- awarded by District Consumer Forum as compensation for mental agony to complainant is set aside and the impugned judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum is modified. Appellant bank is directed to make payment of Rs.50,000/- to complainant with interest at the rate payable on deposits of account of complainant from the date of complaint till date of payment.
The appellant bank is further directed to pay Rs.2,000/- cost awarded by District Consumer Forum to complainant.
In this appeal parties shall bear their own costs.
Rs.25,000/- deposited by appellant under Section-15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in this appeal shall be remitted to District Consumer Forum alongwith interest accrued for disposal in accordance with this judgment.
Let copy of this order be made available to the parties positively within 15 days as per rules.
( JUSTICE A H KHAN )
PRESIDENT
( R C CHAUDHARY )
MEMBER
( SANJAY KUMAR )
MEMBER
pnt
