Tripura

StateCommission

A/6/2018

Branch Manger, State Bank of India - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri. Kishore Kumar Roy - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. Amit Lal Saha, Kajal Nandi

06 Mar 2018

ORDER

Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Agartala.

 

 

Case No.A.6.2018

 

1. The Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,

Khowai Branch, P.O. & P.S. Khowai,

District - Khowai Tripura.

… … … … … … Appellant/Opposite Party.

 

VS.

 

1. Sri Kishore Kumar Roy,

S/o Late Nilkanta Roy,

Proprietor of Sree Guru Motors,

Office Road, P.O. & P.S. Khowai,

District - Khowai Tripura, Pin:799201.

… … … … … … Respondent/Complainant.

 

 

Present

Mr. Justice U.B. Saha,

President,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

Mrs. Sobhana Datta,

Member,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

Mr. Narayan Chandra Sharma,

Member,

State Commission, Tripura.

 

 

 

For the Appellant:                                               Mr. Amrit Lal Saha, Adv.

For the Respondent:                                           None.

Date of Hearing & Delivery of Judgment: 06.03.2018.

 

 

 

 

J U D G M E N T [O R A L]

 

 

U.B. Saha, J,

The instant appeal is filed by the appellant, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Khowai Branch, Khowai against the order dated 03.01.2018 passed by the learned District Consumers Disputes Redressal Forum (hereinafter referred to as District Forum), West Tripura, Agartala  in Execution Case No. EA/33 of 2016 wherein the learned District Forum i.e. the Executing Court directed the Judgment Debtor-Bank, the appellant herein (hereinafter referred to as opposite party/J.D.) to comply with the order of the State Commission and satisfy the decree with the Decree Holder (hereinafter referred to as D.H./complainant).

2. Today the appeal is fixed for admission hearing.
3. Heard Mr. Amrit Lal Saha, Ld. Counsel appearing for the J.D., the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Khowai Branch.
4. Facts needed to be considered by this Commission are as follows:-

The D.H., complainant Sri Kishore Kumar Roy had issued a cheque in favour of one Aparesh Deb for an amount of Rs.7,50,000/- on 06.05.2013. After receipt of the cheque issued by the complainant/D.H., the payee Sri Aparesh Deb deposited the said cheque in his SB Account No.11808857116 at SBI, Khowai Branch, but the Bank Authority/J.D. instead of depositing the aforesaid cheque amount in the savings account of Aparesh Deb, deposited the same in the internal account of the Bank and thus the cheque issued by the complainant/D.H. was dishonoured. The recipient/payee of the cheque was aggrieved and made grievance to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the learned District Forum for deficiency in service of the SBI, Khowai Branch and in his complaint petition, the complainant also claimed compensation amounting to Rs.9 lacs.

5. The opposite party, Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Khowai Branch appeared in the case and by filing written statement denied the claim though admitted the fact that the cheque issued by the complainant was initially deposited in the SBI internal account and then the said amount was transferred to the loan account of Aparesh Deb. After adjustment of Rs.90,000/- on account of legal expenses Rs.6,60,000/- was adjusted against the loan account. This internal arrangement was done for adjusting the outstanding liabilities of the payee on the loan account of him. Thus, there was no deficiency of service on the part of the Bank.
6. The learned District Forum after hearing the parties in the complaint case allowed the complaint petition of the complainant Sri Kishore Kumar Roy and directed the State Bank of India, Khowai Branch for depositing the cheque amounting to Rs.7,50,000/- in the SB A/C of Sri Aparesh Deb in whose favour the cheque was issued and also directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the complainant and Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation, in total Rs.55,000/-. The amount is to be paid within two months and the cheque amounting to Rs.7,50,000/- is to be deposited in the SB A/C of Aparesh Deb within 15 days without fail. If the aforesaid amount of Rs.55,000/- is not paid within the period of two months, then it will carry interest @9% per annum.
7. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned District Forum dated 29.06.2016 in Case No. C.C. 03 of 2016, the appellant Bank i.e. Judgment Debtor filed an appeal before this Commission which was registered as Appeal Case No. A/34/2016.
8. After hearing the parties in the appeal, this Commission partly allowed the appeal holding that the learned District Forum did not commit any wrong so far its direction to the appellant-Bank for depositing the cheque amount of Rs.7,50,000/- in the SB Account of Aparesh Deb vide No.11808857116 is concerned, as the cheque was to be deposited in the said account. It was also held by this Commission that if there is any dispute between the Bank Authority and the loanee Aparesh Deb, the recipient, then the Bank Authority should have deposited the cheque amount first in the account of Aparesh Deb, recipient/loanee and then after informing him, the loan amount could be adjusted following the procedure, but the appellant-Bank failed to do so.
9. As the complainant-petitioner did not prefer any appeal against the judgment of the learned District Forum and also did not make Sri Aparesh Deb, the recipient of the cheque, a party in his complaint petition in the instant case, this Commission was unable to accept the contention of Mr. Datta, Ld. Counsel for the complainant so far refund of the cheque amount to the account of the complainant. It was also held that after issuance of the cheque by the complainant, it was the recipient Aparesh Deb who could claim the money as the cheque was deposited by him and the fact remained that the Aparesh Deb was also not before this Commission. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the submission of the Branch Manager, SBI, Khowai Branch that there were some procedural defects and after deposit of the cheque amount in the account of Aparesh Deb, the recipient, the loan amount was to be transferred to the loan account, we were of the opinion that the amount of compensation awarded by the District Forum was in higher side, therefore, we modified the directions of the District Forum regarding the payment of compensation to the complainant petitioner from Rs.50,000/- to an amount of Rs.25,000/- and such an amount had already been deposited with this Commission as statutory deposit. As the Bank Authority forced the complainant to approach the District Forum for dishonouring his cheque, we were of the further opinion that the litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- should remain as it is. Accordingly, the judgment of the Ld. District Forum was modified to the extent as stated above.     
10. After the judgment of this Commission, the D.H. complainant filed an Execution Case being No. EA/33 of 2016 before the learned District Forum. The learned District Forum by its order dated 03.01.2018 in the aforesaid Execution Case passed an order which is as follows:-

“03.01.2018- Learned advocate for D.H. and J.D. appeared. Direct J.D. Bank to comply order of State Commission and satisfy the decree with the D.H.”

11. Being aggrieved by the said order, the J.D., Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Khowai Branch has preferred the instant appeal. 
12. When the matter was taken up for admission hearing, Mr. Amrit Lal Saha, Ld. Counsel assisted by Mr. Kajal Nandi, Ld. Counsel appearing for  the appellant has submitted that as the SB A/C No.11808857116 of Sri Aparesh Deb, the recipient/loanee has been closed on 30.05.2017 and the loan account of the said recipient/loanee being loan A/C No.11808914121 has also been closed on 08.05.2013, it would be difficult for the appellant Bank to execute the order of this Commission, as directed by the learned District Forum.  
13. We have considered the submission of Mr. Saha, Ld. Counsel as well as the order of the learned District Forum as impugned in the instant appeal. According to this Commission, there is no merit in the instant appeal as the learned District Forum did not commit any wrong. We are also not expressing any opinion with regard to the submission of Mr. Saha. The appellant Bank is at liberty to raise their grievances as stated before this Commission in the Execution Case and the learned Execution Court i.e. the learned District Forum can consider the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.  

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.