By : SMT SYEDA SHAHNUR ALI, MEMBER(L)

The case of the complainant in brief is that he is an unemployed person and somehow maintain his livelihood by physical labour and cultivation. The complainant has a Savings Account with the Punjab National Bank Srirampore Branch being A/C No. 3170001700089820 since 26.09.13. The petitioner has  a life insurance Policy  with a financial Company named MAX. On 25.08.143 the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 17,500/- in the account of the above Insurance Co. An agent of the MAX Company took the Savings A/C pass book of the petitioner on the plea that he would retain that pass book in order to continue proper transaction with the Insurance Co.  Ultimately when he took back the pass book for updating the same, he noticed that the amount of Rs. 17,500/- has been withdrawn from his account. Being astonished the petitioner wanted documents of transaction from the bank and found that a fake signature has been made therein for withdrawing the amount by way withdrawal form.

When the complainant wanted further inquiry in this regard, the bank authority threatened him. The complainant is sure that he did not withdraw the amount from his pass book. Hence the complaint.

OP No.1 the Branch Manager of the PNB Srirampur Branch has contested the case by filing its written version.  It is the case of this OP that the complainant Mr. Madhab Pramanik has a Savings Bank Account being No.397000170008920. On 25.08.14 a sum of Rs. 17,500/- was deposited in that account from Max Insurance Co. The complainant has withdrawn that amount of Rs. 17,500/- personally by withdrawal slip on 01.09.14. It is the further contention of this OP that there is no question of putting fake signature of the complainant as alleged in the complaint petition. This OP further claims that there is no merit in the case and it should be dismissed outright.

The OP no.2 contests the case by filing written version and denied all the material allegations of the complaint petition. The specific case of this OP is that OP No.2 acts as an agent of many banking institutions including the OP NO.1. The complainant was one of the clients of the OP No.2 and he collects the premiums from the clients and deposits it with the concerned Bank as of practice and there is no latches on his part in the service for his client. As such the OP no.2 has prayed for dismissal of the complaint petition.

Decision with Reasons        

We have gone through the complaint, written version and the documents filed before this Forum by both the parties.  We find that the OP no.1 has stated in its written version that the complainant had a LIC policy with the MAX Financial Institutions. On 20.08.14 a sum of Rs. 17,500/- was deposited by the complainant in his account No.3170001700089820n with PNB Srirampur Branch. It is also pertinent to note here that complainant in support of his case filed Xerox copies  of withdrawal slip dated 01.09.14 and its own deposit slip of the bank dated 20.08.14 signed in Bengali dialect showing that Rs. 17,500/- was deposited but curiously enough said complainant scribed his signature in English dialect  at different times. The OP No. 2 has also filed his written version and he has admitted that he is an agent of many banking institutions including the OP no.1 herein and being duty bound towards the OP No1 he collected money of premiums from clients.  He also admitted that the petitioner herein was his client at the material time.

At the very instance after filing of this case we find that due to discrepancy regarding service of summons to the OP No.2  the Head Post Master Tamluk Post Office were summoned and he appeared to clarity certain fact, which were not up to the satisfaction of this Forum. 

Be that as it may the OP No.2 was also duty bound to serve the complainant/ petitioner/customers when he is being entrusted with to look after collection of money from the illiterate customers and deposit it in the concerned financial institutions. An agent is appointed by the Company to provide service to the customers.

In the instant case it is averred by the OP No.2 that he is an agent of the OP No 1. In that respect the bank is also responsible in verifying the sanctity of the agents.  As such the OP No. 2 along with OP NO.1 have failed to discharge their duty for which an amount of Rs. 17,500/- has been withdrawn as stated by the complainant without his knowledge.  But from the deposit slip dated 20.08.14 and the withdrawal slip dated 01.09.14 it appears that the signature of the complainant in Bengali dialect tallies with each other.

We do not find any FIR or complaint lodged by the complainant in this regard before the local police station or any forum for Redressal though a letter of complaint was sent vide Registered speed post to the OC Tamluk police station but no formal case was started.

The complainant has placed reliance upon this Forum to squeeze the truth out of the whole incident but he has not filed any cogent evidence to prove his case. Therefore, we do not find anything adverse to presume that the complainant has not withdrawn the amount himself.

As such we find that the complainant has failed to prove his case.

Hence, it is,

O R D E R E D

That the complaint case being No 08 of 2016 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OPs.

Parties do bear their respective costs.

Let copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of costs.