NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/582/2012

SUNIL CHAKRABORTY - Complainant(s)

Versus

STATE BANK OF INDIA & 5 ORS. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. SHUVODEEP ROY

21 Nov 2012

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 582 OF 2012
 
(Against the Order dated 01/06/2012 in Complaint No. 06/2009 of the State Commission Assam)
1. SUNIL CHAKRABORTY
R/o. Netaji Lane, P.O. Silcoorie,
District-Cachar,
ASSAM
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. STATE BANK OF INDIA & 5 ORS.
Having Corporate Office at- Madam Kama Road,
Mumbai-400021
2. THE CHAIRMAN
STATE BANK OF INDIA, CORPORATE CENTRE MADAM CAMA ROAD,
MUMBAI-400021
3. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, BENGAL CIRCLE, SAMRIDDHI BHAWAN , 1, STRAND ROAD,
KOLKATA-700075
4. THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA, PAL BAZAR BRANCH , 1, JHEEL ROAD,
KOLKATA-700075
5. THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA , SANSADIYA SOUDHA (NEW DELHI ) BRANCH PARLIAMENT HOUSE ANNEXE,
NEW DELHI-110001
6. THE BRANCH MANAGER
STATE BANK OF INDIA, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, SILCHAR BRANCH, NIT COMPLEX,
SILCHAR-788010
DISTRICT-CACHAR, ASSAM
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Appellant :MR. SHUVODEEP ROY
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 21 Nov 2012
ORDER

Delay of 74 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Complainant/appellant purchased a bank draft from SBI Branch at Sansadiya Soudha in New Delhi.      The draft was deposited in the Service Branch of SBI at Kolkata on 21.2.2009.  Due to some conflicting version of the parties, the draft could be formally deposited on 17.3.2009 and after clearance/collection, the same was credited to the account of the appellant on 28.3.2009.  The amount could be withdrawn by the appellant on 30.3.2009.  Appellant filed the complaint before the State Commission in Assam alleging that was maltreated by an official at Kolkata Service Branch.

State Commission has dismissed the complaint for want of territorial jurisdiction.  According to the State Commission, neither the cause of action nor a part of the cause of action had arisen in Assam.  State Commission relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in Sonic Surgical vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. – (2010)1 SCC 135 in support of the conclusion arrived at. 

We agree with the view taken by the State Commission.  Neither the cause of action nor a part of the cause of action had arisen in Assam.  The judgement of the Supreme Court in Sonic Surgical case (supra) is fully applicable to the facts of the present case.

No ground for interference is made out.  Dismissed.

Appellant is put at liberty to seek redressal of his grievances from appropriate Forum having territorial jurisdiction and, in case such complaint is filed within 60 days from today, the same be entertained without objection to limitation.

 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.