Meghalaya

StateCommission

A/2/2022

Canara Bank - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri Nganwanlambok Nongsiej - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Mukesh Sharma

18 Oct 2022

ORDER

MEGHALAYA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

                      SHILLONG

 

F.A No.2 of 2022

 

BEFORE

 

Hon’bleMr.Justice(Retd) S.PandeyPRESIDENT

 

Learned Member :Shri W.Khyllep

 

        Learned Member :Shri C.P.Marak

 

Learned Member :Shri W.Synrem

 

Learned Member : Dr. G.B.M Mihsill

 

 

The Branch Manager

CANARA BANK (erstwhile known as Syndicate Bank),

Muda Complex, Police Bazar, Shillong-793001                                               

                                            ...Appellant

 

 

                      -versus-

 

ShriNganwanlambokNongsiej,

Lumsohkhlur, Mairang,

West Khasi Hills District,

Meghalaya                               ...Respondent

 

 

 

 

For the Appellant     :   Shri S.K. Hazarika, Advocate

For the Respondent    :   SmtiTsheringYangi,P.Tariang

                          Advocates

 

Date of Judgement& Order  :14.11.2022

 

Whether to be reported    :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Heard the Counsel for the Appellant and Counsel for the Respondent.

              In the present Appeal a challenge has been made to the Order passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, East Khasi Hills, Shillong (herinin after mentioned as District Consumer Commission) in CC/38/2014, whereby hereunder it was awarded a relief as mentioned in the Order.

“1.The Commission for the reasons discussed above, awards the Complainant;

1. a relief of compensation of interest @ 18 % on the principal amount of Rs 8,82,068/- (Rupees eight lakhs eighty two thousand and sixty eight only) for retaining the amount from 31.07.2013 to 16.12.2013.
2. On 16.12.2013, an amount of Rs 4,50,000/- (Rupees four lakhs and fifty thousand only) was returned. Consequently, an amount of Rs 4,32,068/- (Rupees eight lakhs eighty two thousand and sixty eight only) is awarded for a period from 16.12.2013 to 31.01.2014.
3. The Opposite Party had also retained Rs 1,50,000/- (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only). As such an interest of 18 % is awarded on Rs 1,50,000/- from 31.01.2014 to 12.02.2014.

2. A Compensation of Rs 1,00,000 (Rupees one laks only) is awarded for the financial loss suffered by the Complainant, in his coal business due to the cancellation of the contract for non-payment of money. For mental agony, humiliation, harassment suffered by the Complainant and deficiency in service by the Opposite Party, the Commission awards Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) and cost of litigation, a sum of Rs 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only).

 

          The facts are almost accepted in the present Appeal which are inter alia that the Complainant had on 06.05.2013 deposited a Forex Bill as per LC NO 086713011856 dated 21.04.2013 vide FOBS No 2961 for US$ 15,000/- (US Dollar fifteen thousand. That amount come to Rs 8,82,068 (Rupees eight lakhs eighty two thousand and sixty eight only). The said Bill was cleared by the Bank which also been credited to the account of the Complainant at Syndicate bank, Police bazaar, Shillong. The said Bill was realized by the Bank in the month of July 2013 but the same was not credited to the account of the Complainant even after the request made by the Complainant. The Complainant has made the pleadings in the claim application, that because of shortage of fund, on account of deprivation of the said amount, heloss the coal contract which was due to be paid by 31.12.2013. The claim has been madethat the Bank has not acted negligently, causing the delay which shows deficiency in service, thereby, the Complainant suffered extreme hardship, harassment, mental agony and heavy losses. The claim has been made by the Complainant that he should be awarded an interest @ 24 % on the amount of Rs 8,82,068/- (Rupees eight lakhs eighty two thousand and sixty eight only) with effect from July 2013 up to January 2014. Compensation for a sum of Rs 10 lakhs for financial loss caused to the Complainant in the coal business due to cancellation of coal contract and also he has suffered mental agony, humiliation, harassment suffered by him by litigating the case at the District Consumer Commission. The present case including the cost of litigation Rs 15,000 (Rupees fifteen thousand only).

 

The bank has not disputed the fact that $15,000 was realized  on 31.07.2013 but wrongly it was credited to some other account having similar surname as that of the Complainant, and claim has been made that it was bonafide mistake being a human error which has been contested by the Complainant contending Bank ought to have credited his amount to his account but carelessly the amount was credited to the account of another person which is sheer act of negligence in as much as the Bank ought to have credited the amount in one go,but credited the amount in three installments on three different dateswhich itself shows that the Bank did not act, so, in bonafide manner. Bank has further pleaded that the amount Rs 4,50,000/- (Rupees four lakhs fifty thousand only) was credited to the account of the Complainant on 16.12.2013 and remaining balance was credited on 31.01.2014 and 12.02.2014 an amount of Rs 2,28,068 (Rupees two lakhs twenty eight thousand and sixty eight Only) and Rs 1,50,000 (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) respectively. In such admitted position, the present case as to whether the Complainant has made out the case for the relief he had sought for. It is an admitted fact, that the money was realized on 31.07.2013, but they credited the amount in three installments instead at one go. This shows the act of the Bank Official was not bonefide, at the same time, the Bank was required to be diligent in crediting the amount in the account of the present Complainant/Respondent, but instead of that, as per the bank claim has stated the amount was credited to the account of another person. If that be so, after the realization of the same of their own they ought to have acted bonafide in depositing the amount in one go. But they have failed to do so, this shows deficiency in service which caused the mental agony to the Complainant/Respondent. So certainly the Complainant/Respondent is entitled to the relief in terms of the primary lending rate fixed by the Bank for realization from the default borrower.

          Another aspect of the matter that the District Consumer Commission has granted relief for the loss of business of the claimant on account of failure to get the coal contract. This Commission has to look into and to decide whether the District Consumer Commissionhas acted legally in granting the relief under the heading of loss of business. In the pleadings, the Complainant has made specific pleadings in the claim application, in Para 5 that heavy losses caused in his business as the coal contract was cancelled as he could not get the said amount immediately on its realization was made by the present Appellant/Opposite party and crediting the same in his account. The Claimant/Respondent has been crossed examined on 19.3.2016 who has stated here-under “I did not submit any coal contract with my complaint petition and deposition as well. I did not submit any letter to the effect that my coal contract was cancelled in my claim petition nor in my deposition”

     From the aforesaid fact, it is clear that the Complainant/Respondent though he has stated in his claim application about the loss of business on account of failure to obtain the coal contract, but during the course of cross examination he has stated that he has not produce any material in support of his claim with respect to loss of coal contract. In such circumstances the District Consumer Commission has misdirected themself in granting the relief under the heading of business loss. But with respect to interest in the delay in crediting the amount has correctly been decided in the term mentioned in the Order, accordingly, the claimant will be entitled to the relief of compensation to interest @ 18 % per annum on the principal amount of Rs 8,82,068 (Rupees eight lakhs eighty two thousand and sixty eight only) from 31.07.2013 to 16.12.2013. An amount of Rs 4,50,000 (Rupees four lakhs fifty thousand only) was credited to the account the Complainant would get the interest, for Rs 2,28,000/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty eight thousand only)at the same rate for the period from 16.12.2013 to 31.07.2014. And for Rs 1,50,000 (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand only) the Complainant would be entitled to interest at the same rate from 16.12.2013 to 12.02.2014. The said amount, to be computed by the Bank and also entitle to compensation for mental agony, harassment for Rs 25,000 (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and the cost of ligation up to the amount of Rs 25,000 (Rupees twenty five thousand)only.

     This Commission hereby directed the Bank to calculate the interest amount including the amounts mentioned herein- above to be paid within 60 days. Failure to make the payment, it will carry the additional penal compound interest at the rate of 10% till the payment is made to the Complainant.

     In result, the Appeal is partly allowed and partly dismissed as mentioned herein above.

 

 

  

 Sd/-                         Sd/-

MEMBER                       MEMBER

                                              Sd/-

                                           PRESIDENT

 

 Sd/-                         Sd/-

MEMBER                       MEMBER