Date of filing:12.11.2013
Date of Disposal:30.5.2014
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II::
VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.
Present: SRI A. M. L. NARASIMHA RAO, B.SC., B. L., PRESIDENT
SMT N. TRIPURA SUNDARI, B. COM., B. L., MEMBER
FRIDAY, THE 30th DAY OF MAY, 2014.
C.C.No.191 OF 2013.
Between :
Ettemsetti Appalanaidu, S/o Potaraju, 60 years, Retired Railway Employee, Railway Quarters No.12c, Tenali (RS), Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.
….. Complainant.
And
1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Kottapeta Branch, Door No.11-14-21, Velagaleti Vari Street, K.T.Road, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh.
2. The Deputy General Manager, (DGM), State Bank of India, Near Pushpa Hotel Center, Suryarao Peta, M.G.Road, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh.
…..Opposite Parties.
This complaint is coming before us for final hearing on 15.5.2014 in the presence of Sri Ch.Satyanarayana Murthy, Counsel for complainant and Sri T.V.N.Vasudeva Rao, Counsel for opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 remained absent and upon perusing the material available on record, this Forum delivers the following:
O R D E R
(Delivered by Hon’ble Member Smt N. Tripura Sundari)
This complaint is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The averments of the complaint are in brief:
1. The complainant is a retired railway employee and he has S.B. account No.30047882836 with the 1st opposite party bank for receipt of his retirement benefits. While so the 1st opposite party received Garnishee orders from the Hon’ble VI Additional Senior Civil Judge court, Vijayawada in EP No.246/2013 in O.S.No.1029/2011 with a direction to withheld the amount lying in S.B. Account No.30047882836 relating to Vantakula Appala Naidu, S/o Konda who is respondent/judgment debtor and another order from the Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge Court, Gudivada in I.A.No.1188/2013 in O.S.No.326/2011 with a direction to the 1st opposite party bank to attach the amount lying in the credit of same amount No. relating to Vantakula Appala Naidu, S/o Konda who is defendant until further orders. Those orders does not belong to the complainant. But the opposite parties attached the amount lying in the credit of complainant’s account without proper verification of surname, father’s name and other particulars. In this connection the complainant got issued a legal notice demanding the opposite parties to pay compensation for their negligence in attaching the amount lying to his credit account without verifying the court orders. On receipt of the said notice the opposite parties issued a reply stating that they attached the amount as per court orders and they also addressed letters to the Courts to that effect. The complainant obtained photocopy of attachment orders from the concerned Hon’ble Courts by making copy application and attachments orders does not related to the complainant. The opposite party acted negligently in attaching the amounts lying to the credit of the complainant. Due to which the marriage of his grand daughter was not performed and also the cheque issued by the complainant was also dishonoured with endorsement insufficient funds. Therefore the complainant underwent untold mental agony besides monitoring loss. Hence the complainant is constrained to file this complaint against the opposite parties praying the Forum to direct the opposite parties to pay Rs.2,00,000/- towards damages and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards expenses.
2. The 2nd opposite party remained absent. The version of the 1st opposite party is in brief:
The opposite parties denied all the allegations of the complaint and submitted that the 1st opposite party as garnishee, received the prohibitory order under 0.21, R.52 of C.P.C. from the Hon’ble VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada in E.P.No.246/2013 in O.s.1029/2011 in August, 2013 directing the 1st opposite party to withheld the amount lying in the S.B. account No.30047882836 with the 1st opposite party until further order of the Hon’ble Court. As per the orders of the court the 1st opposite party withheld the amount lying in the said account. The 1st opposite party also received another attachment order under 0.38, R.5 of CPC from the Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada in I.A.No.1188/2013 in O.S.No.326/2013 in the month of August directing the 1st opposite party to withheld the amount lying in the same S.B. Account. As per the orders of the Hon’ble Court the 1st opposite party withheld the amount of same S.B Account. The 1st opposite party as a garnishee obeyed the orders of the Hon’ble Courts. In the meanwhile the complainant got issued a notice dated 5.9.2013 to the 1st opposite party to approach the court immediately to submit the facts. Before receipt of the said notice, the 1st opposite party already addressed the letters to the respective Hon’ble Courts for clarification. As the courts are not functioning due to Samaikyandra Agitation the 1st opposite party could not get the clarification from the Hon’ble Courts. Meanwhile the 1st opposite party got issued reply notice to the complainant stating the facts and requesting to clarify the matter and to approach the respective courts to get necessary orders. After Samaiklyandra Agitation when the courts are functioning, the 1st opposite party received the raising attachment orders from the respective courts as a garnishee to release the amounts in S.B. account No.30047882836. Due to the negligence of the plaintiffs in the respective suits, obtained the orders and served to the garnishee, 1st opposite party has to withheld the amounts in the complainant’s account. The 1st opposite party has to obey the order of the Hon’ble courts as a garnishee but nothing to do with the suit transactions. If any relief is to be claimed the complainant would have filed the complaint against the respective plaintiffs in the respective suits. There is no willful disobedience or negligent acts done by the opposite parties. If really the complainant has sustained any mental agony etc., he would have mentioned the same in his legal notice dated 5.9.2013. there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties towards the complainant and prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.
3. On behalf of the complainant no affidavit was filed. Ex.A.1 to Ex.A.10 are marked. On behalf of the opposite parties Sri B.Ramu, the Branch manager of the 1st opposite party filed his affidavit and got marked Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.4.
4. Heard and perused.
5. Now the points that arise for consideration in this complaint are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service or negligence acts on the part of opposite parties towards the complainant in attaching the S.B. account of the complainant?
2. If so is the complainant entitled for any relief?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled?
POINTS 1 AND 2:-
6. On perusing the material on hand the complainant is the retired railway employee and he has S.B. Account No.30047882836 with the 1st opposite party bank under Ex.A.10 for receipt of his retirement benefits. While so the 1st opposite party received two garnishee orders from Hon’ble VI Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Vijayawada under Ex.A.2 in E.P.No.246/2013 in O.S.No.1029/2011 on 8.8.2012 and another order from Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge Court, Gudivada under Ex.A.1 in I.A.No.1188/2013 in O.S.No.326/2011 on 13.8.2012 with a direction to attach the amount lying in the credit of Account No.30047882836 relating to Vantakula Appala Naidu, S/o Konda, who is the defendant in that cases, until further orders. Those orders do not belong to the complainant. But the opposite parties attached the amount lying in the complainant’s account as per Court orders. Not knowing about the said attachment the complainant issued a cheque for Rs.5,40,000/- in favour of the 3rd party under Ex.A.5 dated 28.8.2013 and it was returned on 3.9.2013 without encashing and endorsing as funds insufficient. Then the complainant got issued a legal notice Ex.A.3 dated 5.9.2013 to the 1st opposite party stating that the garnishee orders from the court are not relating to him and he informed that the surname, and father’s name of the defendants in the said suits are different to the names in S.B. Account of the complainant except account number. He also requested the 1st opposite party to approach the respective courts to inform the facts. On receiving the same the 1st opposite party sent a letter Ex.A.4 dated 12.9.2013 to the complainant stating that as per the court orders bank is bound to withheld/attach the amount lying in the S.B. account No.30047882836 and informed that they have already addressed letters Ex.B.1 and Ex.B.2 dated 29.8.2013 to the Hon’ble Courts for clarification and for necessary actions. The Hon’ble Courts sent clarification letters to the 1st opposite party Ex.B.3 dated 6.12.2013 from the Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada and Ex.B.4 dated 27.11.2013 from the Hon’ble VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, directing the 1st opposite party respectively not to attach any amount lying to credit of S.B. Account No.30047882836which is lying with the 1st opposite party relating to Ettamsetti Appala Naidu, S/o Pothu Raju. On hearing both parties counsels we, the Forum came to conclusion that on receiving the Hon’ble Court attachment/provibitory orders the 1st opposite party noticed the Account No.30047882836 and first withheld the amounts lying in that account. Next the 1st opposite party sent letters to Hon’ble Courts with detailed information about the account which is attached by it and tried to get clarification orders from those courts. Due to Samaikyandhra Agitation the 1st opposite party could not get the facts immediately. Later the 1st opposite party got directions from the respective courts for not to attach the S.B. account No.30047882836 which is related to the complainant. Therefore there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties as they acted as per the orders of the Hon’ble courts and they are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the opposite parties. The complainant has to take necessary actions against the plaintiffs in those two suits who furnished wrong information to the said Hon’ble Courts.
POINT No.3:-
7. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs. The complainant is at liberty to approach proper court against the plaintiffs in the above said two suits for damages.
Typewritten by Stenographer K.Sivaram Prasad, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 30th day of May, 2014.
PRESIDENT MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For the complainant: For the opposite parties:-
None D.W.1 B.Ramu, Branch Manager
of the 1st opposite party (by affidavit)
DOCUMENTS MARKED
On behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A.1 . . Photocopies of Bunch of documents.
Ex.A.2 08.08.2013 Photocopy of Prohibitory Order of VI Addl., Junior Civil Judge at
Vijayawada in E.P.No.246/2013 in O.S.No.1029/2011
Ex.A.3 05.09.2013 Office copy of legal notice.
Ex.A.4 12.09.2013 Photocopy of reply letter.
Ex.A.5 28.08.2013 Photocopy of cheque for Rs.5,40,000/-.
Ex.A.6 . . Photocopy of pay slip issued by South Central Railway, Vijayawada.
Ex.A.7 . . Photocopy of pan card.
Ex.A.8 . . Photocopy of Election Commission of India Identity Card.
Ex.A.9 . . Photocopy of Medical card.
Ex.A.10 . . Photocopy of pass book.
For the opposite parties:-
Ex.B.1 29.08.2013 Letter from the 1st opposite party to the Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada.
Ex.B.2 29.08.2013 Letter from the 1st opposite party to the VI Additional Junior Civil
Judge, Vijayawada.
Ex.B.3 06.12.2013 Letter from the Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada to the 1st opposite party.
Ex.B.4 27.11.2013 Letter from the VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada to the 1st opposite party.
Ex.B.5 29.08.2013 True copy of letter from the 1st opposite party to the VI Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada.
PRESIDENT