New Complaint No.251 of 2023.
Date of Institution:27.10.2023.
Old Complaint No:334 of 2018.
Date of Institution: 02.08.2018.
Date of order:19.01.2024.
Chanan Masih @ Charan Dass Son of Bawa, resident of Village Chaudharpur, P.O Zaffarwal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur Punjab. Aadhaar Card No. 5408 7403 4656.
…......Complainant.
VERSUS
1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Tibri Road, Gurdaspur, Punjab. Pin Code – 143521.
2. Jatinder Singh S/o Rajinder Singh
3. Kamaljit Singh S/o Rajinder Singh
Both residents of Village Chaudharpur, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur.
4. Gurmej Singh
5. Ajmer Singh both residents of Village Chaudharpur, P.O. Zaffarwal, Tehsil and District Gurdaspur.
….Opposite parties.
Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Present: For the Complainant: Sh.J.S. Sran, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party No.1: Sh.Vikas Sharma, Advocate.
Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.
ORDER
Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.
Chanan Masih @ Charan Dass, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against State Bank of India Etc. (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).
2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a citizen of India bearing Aadhaar Card No. 5408 7403 4656 and having Saving Account No. 11077323782, CIP No. 808/6341067 Bank, State Bank of India, Tibri Road, Gurdaspur and the complainant is a retired person from the Indian Armed Force and draws his pension which has been transferred by the opposite party No.1 to the opposite parties No.2 to 5 arbitrary. It is pleaded that the opposite party No.1 has been transferring the amount of the complainant to the opposite parties No.2 to 5 for the last about 2-3 years and the complainant since then is trying its best to redress his claim and also trying its best to acknowledge about missing his pension, but remained till now in vain. It is further pleaded that the complainant wants firstly he be told that why the opposite party No.1 is transferring his pension to the opposite parties No.2 to 5 and secondly how much the amount the opposite party No.1 has transferred to the opposite parties No.2 to 5 and from where the complainant will recover his transferred amount and how long this process will go without getting his written consent etc.? Hence, when the complainant failed to know about then the cause of action for filing the present complaint arose a day when he decided to know about the injustice happening with him. Due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite party No.1 the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. So, there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and negligence in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No.1 and prayed that keeping in view the above said facts the claim of the complainant may kindly be redressed for the sake of fair justice.
3. Upon notice, the opposite party No.1 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filing their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form. It is pleaded that no cause of action has accrued to the complainant against the answering opposite party for filing the present complaint. The complainant has filed the present false complaint by concocting a false story and dragged the answering opposite party in false litigation as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed with special costs. It is further pleaded that fact of matter is that the complainant stood as a guarantor, but the loanee on whose behalf the complainant stood as guarantor committed breach in repayment of the loan amount, despite the sincere efforts made by the answering opposite party No.1. Since, the complainant is a guarantor, therefore he is liable to make payment of the loan amount, as such the amount in question is being deducted from the account of the complainant and the complainant is fully aware about this fact. But, the complainant has filed the present complaint by concealing above mentioned facts and as such he is not entitled to any relief from this Ld. Court. It is further pleaded that entire story put forth by the complainant is totally false and concocted one. As submitted above, the complainant is fully aware about the fact that on what account the amount is being deducted from his account, but he has concealed the true facts. No cause of action has arisen to the complainant for filing the present complaint. Even the complainant does not disclose any cause of action.
On merits, the opposite party No.1 has reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
4. As per order dated 17.09.2018 it had already been mentioned that the opposite parties No.2 to 5 are not necessary parties to be impleaded and relief is claimed only against the opposite party No.1.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Chanan Masih @ Charan Dass, (Complainant) as Ex.CW-1/A alongwith other documents as Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-5.
6. Learned counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Kamal Dhingra, (Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Tibri Road, Gurdaspur) as Ex.OP-1/1 alongwith other documents as Ex.OP-1/2 to Ex.OP-1/21 alongwith reply.
7. Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.
8. Written arguments not filed by both the parties.
9. Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant has retired from Indian Armed Force and has drawn his pension from the opposite party No.1 Bank. It is further argued that opposite party No.1 has illegally transferred the amount from the account of the complainant to the account of opposite parties No.2 to 5 and inspite of repeated enquiries complainant has not been disclosed about the same. Opposite party No.1 had failed to refund the amount withdrawn amount from the account of the complainant and transferred to the account of opposite parties No.2 to 5 which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1.
10. Notice was issued to opposite party No.1 only vide order dated 17.09.2018 and did not issue to opposite parties No.2 to 5 as relief is claimed only against the opposite party No.1.
11. Counsel for the opposite party No.1 has argued that the complainant had voluntarily agreed to stand as guarantor in respect of loans obtained by the opposite parties No.2 to 5 and the complainant had signed the application form and submitted affidavit Ex.OP-1/4 and authorized the Bank to deduct loan installments from his account in all the loan cases. As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1.
12. We have heard the Ld. counsels for the complainant and opposite parties No.1 and gone through the record.
13. To prove his case complainant has placed on record his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CW-1/A, copy of legal notice Ex.C1, postal receipt Ex.C2, copies of Bank Passbook Ex.C3 to Ex.C5 whereas opposite party No.1 has placed on record affidavit of Kamal Dhingra Chief Manager Ex.OP-1/1, copy of loan application Jatinder Singh Ex.OP-1/2, copy of affidavit of Jatinder Singh Ex.OP-1/3, copy of affidavit of Chanan Masih Ex.OP-1/4, copy of authorization letter Ex.OP-1/5, copy of deed of guarantee Ex.OP-1/6, copy of loan application of Kawaljit Singh Ex.OP-1/7, copy of affidavit of Kawaljit Singh Ex.OP-1/8, copy of affidavit of complainant Ex.OP-1/9, copy of authorization letter Ex.OP-1/10, copy of deed of guarantee Ex.OP-1/11, copy of loan application of Gurmej Singh Ex.OP-1/12, copy of affidavit of Gurmej Singh Ex.OP-1/13, copy of affidavit of Chanan Masih Ex.OP-1/14, copy of authorization letter Ex.OP-1/15, copy of deed of guarantee Ex.OP-1/16, copy of loan application of Ajmer Singh Ex.OP-1/17, copy of affidavit of Chanan Masih Ex.OP-1/18, copy of affidavit of Ajmer Singh Ex.OP-1/19, copy of deed of guarantee Ex.OP-1/20 and copy of statement of account Ex.OP-1/21.
14. It is admitted fact that complainant is having bank account with the opposite party No.1 and amounts are being withdrawn and transferred to the account of opposite parties No.2 to 5 by the opposite party No.1. The only issue for adjudication before this Commission is whether the transfer of amounts from the account of the complainant is unjustified or illegal.
15. Perusal of affidavit of the complainant shows that complainant has simply mentioned that opposite party No.1 is withdrawing the amount from his account but has concealed this fact from this Commission that the complainant had stood guarantor in all the loan applications in respect of loans obtained by opposite parties No.2 to 5. Moreover, it is not the case of the complainant that signatures of the complainant on the said documents are forged or were obtained by the opposite party No.1 under some misrepresentation. As such we do not find bank to be deficient in service on the part of opposite party No.1 for having deducted the amount from the account of the complainant.
16. Accordingly, complaint being meritless is ordered to be dismissed with no order as to costs.
17. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
18. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record room.
(Lalit Mohan Dogra)
President
Announced: (B.S.Matharu)
Jan. 19, 2024 Member
*YP*
