IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/19/2018.
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
16.02.18 26.02.18 10.04.19
Complainant: Jahangir Reza
S/o Golam Mostafa
Vill- Hatibandha, G.P-Kasidanga,
PO-Kalabagh, PS-Raghunathganj,
Dist-Murshidabad,
Pin-742213
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1. The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Jangipur Branch
PO&PS-Raghunathganj,
Dist-Murshidabad,
Pin-742225
2. The Post Master(Grade-I),
Jangipur S.O., PS-Raghunathganj
Dist-Murshidabad,
Pin-742213
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : In Person.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.1 : Sri. Satinath Chandra.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party No.2 : Sri. Siddhartha Sankar Dhar.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati………………….......President.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Asish Kumar Senapati, Presiding Member.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Jahangir Reza (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Jangipur Branch and another (here in after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The Complainant has a savings bank account with the OP No.1 Bank being account No.01150061945. The Complainant deposited a cheque on 17.03.18 being cheque No.550926 dated 13.03.18 amounting Rs.33,918/- issued by the OP No. 2. The said amount has not been credited in the account of the Complainant in spite of repeated requests. Hence, the Complainant has filed the case against the OPs praying for getting the amount of Rs.33,918/- along with interest @ 8% p.a. and compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- against the OPs.
The OP No.1 put his appearance and filed written version on 16.05.18, contending that it is very difficult to ascertain the where aboust of the cheque deposited on 17.03.18. The OP No.1 has no deficiency in service and so the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
The OP No.2 also contested the case by filing written version on 16.05.18, contending that the OP No.2 issued a cheque being No.550926 dated 13.03.08 amounting Rs.33,918/- in favour of the Complainant and the OP No.2 has no knowledge about the fate of the said cheque.
On the basis of the above versions following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case :
Points for decision
- Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1, as alleged?
- Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Point no.1
The Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer as he hired the services of the OPs for consideration.
On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record and on a careful consideration over the submission of both sides, we find that the Complainant is a consumer in terms of section 2 (I )(d) (ii) of the C.P.Act, 1986 as he hired services of the OP for consideration.
Point No.2
The Complainant submits that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is also within pecuniary limit of the District Forum.
On a careful consideration over the materials on record, we find that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and this Forum has pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Both the points are thus disposed of.
Point Nos.3&4
The Complainant submits that the amount of Rs.33,918/- has not been credited in his account by the O.P. No.1 in spite of the fact that he deposited the cheque being No. 550926 dated 13.03.08 issued by the OP No.2 on 17.03.18. He prays for a direction upon the O.P. No. 1 for crediting the same amount along with compensation and litigation cost.
In reply, the Ld. Advocate for the OP No.1 submits that the OP has already filed the statement of accounts dated 03.10.18 from which it appears that the amount of Rs.33,918/- had duly been credited in the account of the Complainant on 17.03.18. He argues that some entries of the old Pass Book of the Complainant were wrong for which there was a misunderstanding.
It is contended that the balance amount in the Pass Book dated 11.04.08 was Rs.12,549.07/- and it also appears in the statement of account dated 03.10.18. He contends that the amount of Rs.33,918/- had duly been credited on 17.03.08 and the balance up to 11.04.18 was Rs.12,549.07/-. It is argued that the O.P. No. 1 has no deficiency in service.
The Ld. Advocate for the O.P. No.2 submits that there is no allegation against the O.P. no. 2 and the O.P. No. 2 is an unnecessary party.
The Complainant has also gone through the statement of account dated 03.10.18 submitted by the OP No.1 and also his old Pass Books of his savings account. He submits that he did not know that Rs.33,918/- was credited in his S/B account on 17.03.18 and he was confused to see that there was no entry in his S.B account in respect of Rs. 33,918/-.
On a careful consideration over the entire materials, we find that the Complainant was not aware of the fact that the amount of Rs.33,918/- was credited on 17.03.18 in his S.B. account due to some wrong entries in his Pass Book. We think that the Complainant has filed the case due to misunderstanding. We find that the OP No.1 has no deficiency in service as the amount of Rs.33,918/- had duly been credited on 17.03.18 in the savings bank account of the Complainant. The Complainant has not prayed for any relief against the OP No.2.
We think that the OP No.1 has no deficiency in service and the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief against any of the OPs.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 16.02.18 and admitted on 26.02.18. This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.
In the result, the Consumer case fails.
Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint case No. CC/19/2018 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against the OPs without cost.
Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment as per rules, for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:
confonet.nic.in
Dictated & corrected by me.
President
Member President.
