Delhi

StateCommission

A/21/2015

UCO BANK - Complainant(s)

Versus

SH. GAUTAM AWASTHI - Opp.Party(s)

01 May 2017

ORDER

IN THE STATE COMMISSION : DELHI

 

(Constituted under Section 9 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

Date of Decision :01.05.2017

 

First Appeal No. 21/2015

 

(Arising out of the order dated 11.12.14 passed in Complaint Case No.890/11 passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum-VI, New Delhi District.)

 

In the matter of

UCO Bank,

Supreme Court Branch

New Delhi-110 001

 

Through its AGM

……Appellant

 

 

                                                                     Versus                    

 

Sh. Gautam Awasthi

S/o H.N. Awasthi

R/o 61, Supreme Enclave

Mayur Vihar Phase-I

Delhi.

 

…Respondent

 

 

CORAM

Justice Veena Birbal, President

Salma Noor, Member

1.         Whether reporters of local newspaper be allowed to see the judgment?

2.         To be referred to the reporter or not?

 

 

 

 

 

Justice Veena Birbal, President

1.          This is an appeal under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act (in short, ‘the Act’) wherein challenge is made to ex-parte order dated 11.12.14 passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-VI, New Delhi District (in short, ‘the District Forum’), in CC No. 890/11 whereby the complaint of the respondent/complainant is allowed and the appellant/OP has been directed to credit Rs.42,000/-  in account of respondent/complainant with Saving Bank interest applicable for date of withdrawal till  date of crediting.  Further, Rs.20000/- has been awarded  as a compensation for deficiency and litigation expenses to the respondent/complainant.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for disposal of the complaint are as under:-

A complaint under section 12 of the Act was filed by the respondent/complainant before the Ld. District forum stating therein that he is having a Saving bank account with the appellant/OP. It was alleged that from 7.9.09 to 13.9.09, the respondent/complainant was out of station. When he came back to Delhi he tried to take out money from ATM and found that there was very less amount in his account.He took a statement of account for the period from 9.9.09 to 11.9.09 and found unauthorized withdrawals of Rs.42,000/-from his account by forging his signatures on the cheques dated 8.9.09 and 10.9.09. Accordingly, a complaint was filed before the District Forum that the cheques were bearing forged signatures and the bank could not have allowed to withdraw the amount. The respondent/complainant made a prayer for direction to appellant/OP to remit the amount of Rs.42,000/- alongwith 18% interestto the account of the respondent/complainantand also to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation, punitive damages & litigation expenses to the respondent/complainant.

3.          The impugned order is an ex-parte order.
4.          The stand of the appellant/OP is that it was never served before the District Forum otherwise there was no reason why it would not have contested the matter by putting the defense. It is submitted that the appellant/OP has a good case on merits as such chance be given to it for contesting the case.
5.          We have called for the record from the District Forum and perused the same. The complaint is admitted on 3.10.11  by the District Forum and on 23.3.12, the appellant/OP had been proceeded ex-parte.
6.          Ld. Counsel for respondent/complainant has contended that the appellant/OP intentionally did not appear before the District Forum. However, after some arguments Ld. Counsel for the respondent/complainant states that for effective disposal of the case on merits, he has no objection if the impugned order dated 11.12.14 is set aside  subject to payment of costs as delay has been caused due to non appearance of appellant/OP.
7.          We have considered the submissions made and perused the material on record. For the effective disposal of case on merits, we feel appropriate that appellant/OP be given chance to contest the case on merits. Further no objection is also given by respondent/complainant. Accordingly,  we accept the appeal and set aside the order dated 11.12.14 and remand back the case to the Ld. District Forum subject to payment of costs of Rs.8,000/- to respondent/complainant.
8.          Parties shall appear before the District Forum on 30.5.2017.
9.          On the said date appellant/OP shall pay the costs of Rs.8,000/- to the respondent/complainant and shall also file its written statement. Thereafter, the District Forum shall proceed further in the matter in accordance with the law.  Since the complaint is of 2011, the Ld.District Forum shall make all endeavor to dispose it of within six months.
10.          A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and also to the District Forum-VI, New Delhi district for information.
11.          File be consigned to Record Room.

As prayed order be also given ‘dasti’.

 

 (Justice Veena Birbal)

President

 

(Salma Noor)

Member