Haryana

Ambala

CC/260/2019

Harjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sh Sunil Kumar - Opp.Party(s)

Vivek Sachdeva

05 Dec 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	260 of  2019
Date of Institution	:	20.08.2019
Date of decision	:	05.12.2022

 

Harjit Singh aged about 49 years s/o Shri Gurcharan Singh, R/o Village & Post Office- Raiwali, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala (Mb.No.99966-29431).

          ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

1. Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Village & Post Office-Raiwali, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala, through its Branch Manager.
2. State Bank of India, Village Sarangpur (UT), Chandigarh, through its' Branch Manager,

                                                                                   ….…. Opposite Parties.

Before:       Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member.

          Shri. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:-     Shri Vivek Sachdeva, Advocate, counsel for the complainant.

                   Shri Rakesh Achint, Advocate, counsel for the OP No.1.

                             Ms. Upma Bhalla, Advocate, counsel for the OP No.2.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

                    (i) To allow the complainant to operate his individual Saving     Account No.83300100003989 and withdraw the entire                               amount out of the said saving account maintained with the OP No.1, keeping in view of dishonest and malafide act and conduct  of OP No.1.

(ii) To grant interest at the rate of 24% p.a. on the amount of loan of Rs.5,00,000/-, which the complainant was forced to take from market @2% p.m. to fulfill his emergent needs for agriculture work from the date of loan till date of entire payment;

(iii) To pay a sum of Rs 1,00,000/- on account of compensation for causing deficiency in services and unfair trade-practice, harassment, mental torture and agony and damages to the complainant by the OPs by colluding with each others;

(iv) To pay Rs.22,000/- as cost of litigation.

(v) Grant any other relief which this Commission may deems fit.

2.             Brief facts of the case are that the complainant has been maintaining his Individual Account No.83300100003989 in the branch of the OP No.1 i.e. Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Village and Post Office-Raiwali, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala. Complainant received amount of Rs.11,50,000/- in his aforesaid individual account on 06.06.2019 from the joint account bearing No.55091150042, maintained by his mother Smt. Satwant Kaur, brother-Dilbar Singh and uncle-Jagir Singh, in State Bank of Patiala Village Sarangpur (UT), Chandigarh i.e. the OP No.2 (now merged in State Bank of India). Before the transfer of the aforesaid amount in the Individual account of the complainant, the Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Village Sarangpur, took no objection from the joint account holders. The complainant-Harjit Singh is real nephew of Shri Jagir Singh s/o Shri Gokal Singh. Jagir Singh was unmarried and issueless; he had been cared and looked after by the complainant nicely since long and Jagir Singh was happy with the services rendered by the complainant towards him. Out of love and affection and the services, which were being rendered by the complainant and others, Shri Jagir Singh had executed a valid Will dated 28.04.2003, while he was sound and disposing mind and was 78 years old. He was very much capable to understand about his future when he testated his last and valid Will dated 28.04.2003 qua all his moveable and immoveable property, which he got registered in the office of Sub Registrar, Naraingarh in the presence of marginal witnesses vide Parlekh No.11, Bahi No.03 dated 28.04.2003, in favour of Smt. Surinder Kaur, Harjit Singh and Dilbar Singh in equal shares. Unfortunately Shri Jagir Singh died on 14.02.2016. Thereafter the complainant, number of times attempted to withdraw the amount from his aforesaid individual saving account but the OP No.1 initially postponed the payment from his individual account by making excuses on one pretext or the other and afterwards the OP No.1 started ignoring the complainant. The complainant being an agriculturist, in order to fulfill his financial emergent needs to purchase items for Agriculture purposes got aforesaid amount transferred from the joint account for which his mother and brother gave no objection to the Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Sarangpur Branch i.e. the OP No.2. Moreover, when the complainant received the amount in his individual saving account, the OP No.1 promised the complainant that he can withdraw the amount at any time. The complainant number of times requested the OP No.1 to allow him to withdraw the part of the amount to fulfill his emergent needs and daily needs but the OP No.1 paid no heed to his request for the reasons best known to it and under the constrained circumstances, the complainant had to owe the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from the market on an exorbitant rate of interest. The OPs have caused mental, physical and economical harassment to the complainant as he had to kept waiting for hours together in the branch of the OPs and after getting him sat in the bank for hours together, the OPs used to send him by making excuses to come again and lastly told him that he cannot withdraw the amount because the officials of the OP No.2 Bank have raised objection to the effect that the complainant cannot be allowed to withdraw the amount out of his own individual saving A/c No.83300100003989. Complainant got served with a legal Notice dated 03.08.2019 upon the OPs, which was posted on 05.08.2019 just to avoid the legal battle, asking the OPs to allow the complainant to operate the account and further to allow to withdraw the amount in lacs from his Saving Account No.83300100003989 maintained in the branch of OP No.1 but to no avail. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, the OP No.1 appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, cause of action, jurisdiction, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts and locus standi etc. On merits, it has been stated that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the matter in between the complainant and legal heirs of one Jagir Singh S/o Gokul Singh regarding the moveable and immovable properties of Jagir Singh is Subjudice before the civil courts. The true facts of the present case are that on 06.6.2019 an amount of Rs.11,50,000/- was credited from the joint account bearing no. 55091150042 of Complainant, his mother, his brother and his uncle Jagir Singh through RTGS from State Bank of India, Sarangpur Branch, Chandigarh in the account bearing no. 8330010000399 of Complainant maintained with OP No.1 i.e. Sarava Haryana Gramin Bank, Raiwali Branch, Ambala and on 07.6.2019,  OP No.1 received a letter from OP No. 2 with a request to put on hold on the above said amount of Rs.11,50,000/- as the matter regarding entitlement of the amount is subjudice in the court of Ms. Saloni Gupta, Civil Judge, Junior division, Chandigarh between the legal heirs in the case titled as Bhupinder Singh and Ors. Versus State Bank of India and ors. vide civil suit no. 423/2016 in which present complainant is party/defendant no.3. After the amount credited in the Bank of OP No.1, a summons was also received by OP No.1 from the court of Ms. Saloni Gupta, C.J (J.D), Chandigarh. In order to avoid any further complications and to avoid the multiplicity of proceedings, OP No.1 put hold on the above said amount and there is no deficiency in services on the part of OP No.1. In view of the above stated facts, circumstances and litigations pending or decided between the complainant and other legal heirs of Jagir Singh regarding the moveable and immovable properties, the complainant has concealed the above said facts from this Commission and  when the matter is already in the Civil court, complainant could have approach the said civil court, rather he has chosen to file the present complaint without disclosing the facts regarding the disputes and litigations between the complainant and other legal heirs of Jagir Singh. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OP No.1 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.
4.           Upon notice, the OP No.2 appeared and filed written version and raised preliminary objections with regard to maintainability, estoppal, cause of action, not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts and locus standi etc.  On merits, it has been stated that one Jagir Singh S/o Sh. Gokul Singh was having the Saving Account No. 55091150042 with the OP No.2. Sh. Jagir Singh vide application dated 10.08.2006 requested the OP No.2 to convert his saving account into Joint Account and further requested to add one Smt. Satwant Kaur, Sh. Surjit Singh, Sh. Harjit Singh and Sh. Dalbir Singh. Accordingly, OP No.2 while acting upon the request of Sh. Jagir Singh, converted the account into a Joint account. After the death of Sh. Jagir Singh on 14.02.2016, Sh. Bhupinder Singh and Sh. Lakhvir Singh, claiming themselves to be the legal heirs of Sh. Jagir Singh, filed Civil Suit bearing case no. 423/2016 i.e. Suit for Permanent Injunction and Declaration against the complainant and others and OP No.2 is also a party in the said case. In this case, the Plaintiffs are claiming that they are entitled to the amount lying in the Account. No.55091150042, maintained by the OP No.2. The said case is pending before the court of Ms. Saloni Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division) Chandigarh. On 06.06.2019, the complainant approached OP No.2 without disclosing the dispute which is pending before the court of Ms. Saloni Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division) Chandigarh and got transferred the sum of Rs.11,50,000/- through RTGS dated 06.06.2019 to his individual account bearing no.8300100003989, maintained with Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Raiwali, Distt. Ambala. However, the very next day, on 07.06.2019, OP No.2 came to know about the fraudulent act of the complainant, OP No.2 immediately wrote a letter to the OP No.1 and requested to put on hold on the above said amount of Rs. 11,50,000/- as the matter regarding entitlement of the amount is sub-Judice. The complainant has served the false and frivolous Notice dated 03.08.2019 with malafide intention and ulterior motive which was duly replied vide reply dated 22.08.2019 but inspite of that the complainant has filed the present false and frivolous complaint by concealing the material facts. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OP No.2 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with heavy and exemplary costs.
5.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CA, alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 to C-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No.1 tendered affidavit of Gunjan Preeti, Assistant Manager, Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Village Raiwali, Tehsil-Naraingarh, Ambala as Annexure OP-1/A alongwith documents Annexure OP1/1 to OP1/9 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1. Learned counsel for OP No.2 tendered affidavit of Shri Ashwani Kumar, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Village Sarangpur, UT, Chandigarh as Annexure OP-2/A alongwith documents as Annexure OP -2/1 to OP-2/5 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.2.
6.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file and also gone through the written arguments filed by the learned counsel for the OP No.2.
7.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that by not allowing the complainant to withdraw his own amount of Rs.11,50,000/- from his account,which was transferred with the consent of the OPs in his account,       the OPs were deficient in providing service and also indulged into unfair trade practice.
8.           On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs No.1 and 2 submitted that the matter regarding the amount referred to above, is pending  before the court of Ms. Saloni Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division) Chandigarh and on 06.06.2019, the complainant without disclosing the said dispute has got transferred the sum of Rs.11,50,000/- through RTGS dated 06.06.2019 to his individual account bearing no. 8300100003989 maintained with Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Raiwali, Distt. Ambala and the matter now needs to be decided after leading detailed evidence, as such, this complaint is not maintainable before this Commission, proceedings of which are summary in nature.
9.           It is pertinent to mention here that perusal of record of this case reveals that there has been the allegations of fraud etc. on the part of the complainant, by the OPs, with regard to transfer of amount of Rs.11,50,000/- from the account of the deceased Jagir Singh. Furthermore, it is also coming out from the record that the matter regarding entitlement of the amount in question alongwith other amount is sub-Judice in the Civil Court. Apart from the complainant, other parties i.e. legal heirs of Jagir Singh are also fighting the case with regard to the amount in question in the civil court. This fact has never been disclosed by the complainant in this complaint for the reasons best known to him. In our considered opinion, complicated questions of facts and law are involved in this case, which will require a lot of detailed evidence, which this Commission is not competent to do so, under summary proceeding. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Synco Industries vs State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur, decided 15 January, 2002 Bench: S.P. Bharucha Cj., Umesh C. Banerjee, Bisheshwar Prasad Singh CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 6453 of 2000 has held that the cases where detailed evidence would have to be led,  it would not be appropriate to be heard and disposed of in a summary fashion before the Consumer Courts and the same has to be relegated to the Civil Court.
10.           In this view of the matter, this complaint stands dismissed with no order as to cost. However, the complainant is at liberty to avail appropriate remedy available to him under the platform of law. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties concerned as per rules. File be annexed and consigned to the record room.          

Announced on: 05.12.2022.

 

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President