Complainant/petitioner was having SB Account with the respondent.  On 2.7.2002, he signed a self cheque for Rs.7,000/- for domestic expenses and handed over the same to his son Rajnikant.  Thereafter he went to Bemetara to attend to his duties.  On 3.7.2002, the aforesaid cheque was lost somewhere and as it could not be traced despite efforts made to trace it.  The wife and daughter of the Complainant approached the respondent bank and intimated the officials of the bank about the loss of the cheque and requested them to stop payment of the said cheque.  According to the petitioner, the bank officials told them that the payment of cheque could be stopped only at the request of the account holder.   Next day the petitioner came to know that somebody had deposited Rs.2,000/- in his account and withdrew Rs.70,000/- from his account.      

Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed a Complaint before the District Forum.

District Forum, vide its Order dated 18.4.2006, allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay an amount of Rs.68,000/- to the petitioner along with interest @ 6%.  Rs.1,000/- were awarded by way of compensation and Rs.500/- as costs.

Respondent, being aggrieved, filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been allowed by observing that the allegations regarding forgery and cheating required detailed investigation, which was not possible in a summary proceeding before the consumer fora.  Petitioner was advised to approach the civil court for redressal of his grievances, if any.

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Consumer fora are required to decide the cases in a summary manner.  The allegations regarding forgery and cheating require detailed investigation of facts, which cannot be done in a summary manner.  Petitioner is well-advised to approach the civil court for redressal of his grievances.

Petitioner would be at liberty to seek relief from civil court along with an application under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act for condoning the delay for the time spent before the consumer fora, keeping in mind the observations made by the Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works vs.PSG Industrial Institute – (1995) 3 SCC 583