Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

RP/16/2022

Mr. Senthilkumar, S/o Subramaniam, Velandipalayam, Coimbatore-25 - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Coimbatore-600 011 And 3 others - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. R. Swarnavel

01 Nov 2022

ORDER

IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI

 

                           BEFORE :       Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. SUBBIAH                              PRESIDENT

                                          Thiru R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                               MEMBER

 

R.P.NO.16/2022

 

(Against CMP.No.22/2020 in CC.NO.275/2016 on the file of the DCDRC, Coimbatore)

 

DATED THIS THE 1^st DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022

                            

Senthilkumar

S/o. Subramaniam

26, Ananda Housing Colony                                           M/s. R.Swarnavel

Velandipalayam                                                                 Counsel for

Coimbatore - 25                                                   Petitioner / Complainant

 

                  Vs.

 

1.       The Branch Manger

          Canara Bank, Saibaba Colony Branch

          Coimbatore – 600 011

 

2.       V.K.S. Kannivel

          Chief Manger, Canara Bank

          Saibaba Colony Branch

          Coimbatore – 600 011

 

3.       Mrs. Chandrika,  Manager

          Recovery and Legal Section

          Canara Bank, Circle Office                                  

          TV Samy Road, RS Puram                                          

          Coimbatore                                         

 

4.       Ravi, The Branch Manager                                   M/s. T.S.Gopalan & Co.,

          Canara Bank, Saibaba Colony Branch                           Counsel for

          Coimbatore – 11                                         Respondents/ Opposite parties

 

          This Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/Complainant praying to set aside the order dt.24.5.2022 made in CMP.No.22/2020 in CC.No.275/2016 before the District Commission, Coimbatore.

 

          The Petition is coming up before us today for consideration, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for both parties, this commission made the following order in the open court.

 

ORDER

 

JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH,   PRESIDENT    (Open Court)

  

1.       This Revision Petition is filed as against the order of the District Commission dt.24.5.2022 in CMP.No.22/2020 in CC.No.275/2016 praying for a direction to the Petitioner/ complainant to implead the proposed party as 5^th opposite party in original complaint.

 

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is as follows:

            The Respondent / complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission stating that he is having a Savings Bank Account with the opposite party.  One Dr.Gowrishankar of Vishnupriya Hospital, Edayarpalayam is the family friend of the complainant.  The said doctor’s mother Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah, approached the complainant for obtaining loan of Rs.5 Lakhs to meet out some urgent expenses.  As their family is well known to the complainant, he had given Rs.5 lakhs on 4.6.2013 by obtaining Demand promissory note.  But she had never bothered to repay the said loan.  Finally on 15.10.2015, Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah, met the complainant and gave a cheque for portion of the loan amount, drawn of Bank of India, Saibaba Colony branch, Coimbatore, with a promise to repay the balance amount in a short period.  The complainant presented the said cheque, and the same was realized in his account.  But Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah thereafter wanted to engage some fraudulent tactics, made some false complaint before the B-11 Saibaba Colony Police Station.  Because of the complaint,   the opposite party bank had prevented the complainant from withdrawing the said amount from his account, for the reason best known to them.   Thus alleging negligence, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission.

 

3.       Pending enquiry of the complaint, the Respondents/opposite parties filed a petition before the District Commission, by praying to implead Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah as a party to the proceedings.

 

4.       The District Commission had allowed the said interim petition by directing the complainant to implead Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah as 5^th opposite party.  Aggrieved over the above order, the present Revision petition is filed. 

 

 5.      Having considered the submissions made, we are of the considered opinion that since the allegation is based on the cheque issued by said Mrs. Pushpam Subbiah, impleading her as a party to the proceedings will only help the District Commission for proper adjudication.   The Petitioner/ complainant also had not made out any valid grounds for not impleading Mrs.Pushpam Subbiah as a party.  Therefore, this Revision is filed only on flimsy grounds, and we find no error in the order passed.  Accordingly the Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. 

 

6.       In the result, the Revision Petition is dismissed, by confirming the order of the District Commission in CMP.No.22/2020 in CC.No.275/2016 dt.24.5.2022.  There is no order as to cost.

            The District Commission shall dispose of the main complaint preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt of the order.

 

 

            R VENKATESAPERUMAL                                       R. SUBBIAH

                          MEMBER                                                        PRESIDENT