DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __05_ _ OF ___2017
DATE OF FILING :_8.1.2017 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT: 13.9.2018
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Subrata Sarker
COMPLAINANT : Arun Kumar Manna, son of late Pannalal Manna of Nungi Shkra para, P.O Batanagar, P.S Maheshtala, Kolkata-140.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. The Manager, Batanagar Co-operative Society Limited, P.O Batanagar, P.S Maheshtala, Dist. South 24-Parganasd, Kol- 140.
2. Sabita Manna, wife of Arun Kumar Manna of Nungi Shkra para, P.O Batanagar, P.S Maheshtala, Kolkata-140.
3. The Manager , Bata Sudia Ltd. P.O Batanagar, P.S Maheshtala, Dist. South 24-Parganasd, Kol- 140.
_______________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
With the allegation of deficiency in service lodged against the O.Ps, the complainant has filed the instant case under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 .
The facts leading to the filing of the instant case may be epitomized as follows.
The complainant has maintained a Savings Bank Account bearing no. SP/VII-SM/24486 (M. NO-14620) with Batanagar Cooperative Society Ltd. i.e O.P-1 of which he is a member. His Pass book went missing and, therefore, he could not operate the said account as and when necessary. A sum of Rs. 4 lac being his PF final payment and also a sum of Rs.1,31,000/- being his gratuity were deposited in the said account. He applied for duplicate pass book , but the same was not issued in his favour by the O.P-1. Now, the complainant prays for issue of a direction upon the O.P-1 to allow him to operate the account, to furnish a statement of account showing accrual of up-to-date interest and also to pay compensation etc. Hence, arises the instant case.
The O.P-2 has not filed any written statement to contest the case, inspite of service of summons upon her and, therefore, the case is heard exparte against her.
O.P-3 has filed a written statement ,wherein it is contended by him that the case is not maintainable against him for the reason that there is no relief prayed for against him ,nor has there arisen any cause of action against him. So, to him ,the case should be dismissed in limini against him.
O.P-1 i.e the Manager of Batanagar Co-operative Society Ltd. has not turned up to contest the case, but he has sent a letter dated 29.3.2017 ,which is treated as written version of his statement. According to him, there was a dispute between the complainant and his wife ,Sabita Manna i.e O.P-2 and that he has settled the said dispute as per direction of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court passed in W.P no.16274(W) of 2012 and has made payment of 75% of the amount lying in the account to O.P-2, less 75% of the loan amount of Rs.60,710/- i.e Rs.45,532/- vide O.P-1’s Secretary’s letter dated 3.5.2014. It has further been submitted by the O.P-1 that he will release the amount whatever is due to the complainant ,if so directed by the Forum.
Upon the averments of the parties, the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Are the O.Ps guilty of deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
Evidence on affidavit is filed on behalf of the complainant and same is kept in the record after consideration.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :
O.P-1 is the Manager of Batanagar Co-operative Society Ltd. and it is admitted by him that there is a savings bank account of the complainant maintained with him in his society. It is also fact that pass book of the account of the complainant remains with his wife i.e Sabita Manna (O.P-2) and it transpires in the letter dated 29.3.2017 submitted by the O.P-1. It is also submitted by the O.P-1 that he has released a sum of Rs.3,30,353.88 in favour of Smt. Sabita Manna (O.P-2) from the account of the complainant and that was done , as stated by the O.P-1, in accordance with the direction of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court passed in W.P no. 16274 (W) of 2012. In the face of all these undisputed facts , it is to be seen whether O.P-1 has committed any deficiency in service while releasing the fund from the account of the complainant. It is the version of the complainant that nothing was informed to him by the O.P-1 while releasing fund from his account and that O.P-1 has released the said fund without his consent. The defense of O.P-1 is that he released the said fund in accordance with the direction of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court passed in W.P no. 16274 (W) of 2012.
Let us see now what the direction of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was. A Photostat copy of the said direction of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court passed in W.P no. 16274 (W) of 2012 has been filed before us and the same is kept in the record. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court passed in W.P no. 16274 (W) of 2012 an order on 9.7.2013 and the relevant portion of the said order is quoted herein below:-
“Having heard the Ld. Advocates for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the suggestion advanced by Mr. Bhattacharya ,the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent-3 and its Secretary and Branch Manager to sort out the problem and settle the matter regarding disbursement of the amount, lying in the Batanagar Employees Cooperative Society, upon hearing the petitioner and the respondent no.7 expeditiously”.
The instant complainant was arrayed as respondent no.7 and the instant O.,P-1 as respondent no.3 in the said writ petition before the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, which directed the respondent no.3 i.e O.P-1 herein to settle the matter regarding the disbursement of the amount upon hearing the petitioner i.e Sabita Manna (O.P-2) and respondent no.7 i.e the complainant herein.
O.P-1 has stated that he has settled the mater and disbursed the amount in favour of Sabita Manna i.e O.P-2. But he does never show even for a moment that he issued any notice to the instant complainant before proceeding with the settlement of his dispute with his wife. It is the version of the complainant that he knows nothing else about such move taken by the O.P-1. O.P-1 has filed a letter before this Forum which has been treated as written version of his statement. In that letter, it has been falsely stated by the O.P-1 that the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court by its order dated 9.7.2013 directed to pay 75% of the money of the instant complainant lying in his account maintained with O.P-1. Such direction was never issued by the Hon’ble High Court and the Hon’ble High Court only directed O.P-1 to take initiative for amicable settlement between the complainant and the O.P-2 after giving notice to both sides. But O.P-1 has not issued any notice to the complainant and it is also not so mentioned in his letter dated 29.3.2017. Now ,it is found that the O.P-1 has flouted the order of Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta and has not acted in accordance with the direction of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court. He has acted arbitrarily and has arbitrarily disbursed the amount of the complainant from his account in favour of O.P-2, flouting the order of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court and disbursal of the amount from the account of the complainant without consent of the complainant is clear instance of deficiency in service, which has certainly caused a tremendous mental agony and suffering to the complainant. The complainant is ,therefore, entitled to get compensation from the O.P-1 on this count and O.P-1 will have to pay this for his highhanded and arbitrary act. It is the allegation of the complainant that he applied for issue of a duplicate pass book ,but O.P-1 has not issued any such pass book in his favour and has thus prevented him from operating his account maintained with O.P-1. It is stated by the O.P-1 in his letter dated 29.3.2017 that passbook remained with Sabita Manna and that he produced the said passbook before him. If the pass book is produced by Sabita Manna i.e O.P-2 to O.P-1, why the said pass book was not detained by the O.P-1. O.P-1 could have detained the said passbook and instead of doing that thing, he has released a sum of Rs.3,30,353.88 in favour of O.P-2 from the account of the complainant without feeling any necessity to inform anything to the complainant about such release of money from his account. Non-detention of the pass book by the O.P-1 and non-release of a duplicate pass book in favour of the complainant is also an act of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P-1. O.P-2 should also have delivered the pass book to the complainant. But she has detained it unscrupulously with ulterior motive. Such detention of the pass book by the O.P-2 is also an act of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P-2.
Now about the O.P-3. O.P-3 is the employer of the complainant. He released the cheque of final payment and gratuity of the complainant in favour of the O.P-2, but not in favour of the complainant. An employee is entitled to get the cheque of PF Payment and gratuity. But, in the instant case, it is found that the O.P-3 i.e the employer of the complainant has deviated from that general rule , the reason is best known to him. But in the instant case, there is no relief prayed for by the complainant against the O.P-3 and on perusal of the petition of complaint it is found that there is no cause of action arising against O.P-3. In the circumstances, we cannot but say that the complaint is not maintainable against O.P-3 and it deserves to be dismissed against him for that reason.
Upon what have been discussed above, it is found that the complainant is entitled to get the relief and the relief is provided accordingly as hereunder.
In the result, the case succeeds .
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is allowed exparte against the O.P nos. 1 and 2 with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the O.P-1 to the complainant.
The case stands dismissed against O.P-3 for want of cause of action.
In the facts and circumstances as discussed above, the following directions are issued as follows:-
- O.P-2 i.e Sabita Manna is to make over the original pass book to the complainant through this Forum or O.P-1 within a month of this order ,failing which she will have to pay a compensation of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant with interest @8% p.a till full realization thereof.
- O.P-1 is not to allow withdrawal of money from the account of the complainant to any one other than the complainant and also to hand over the up-to-date statement of account to the complainant with interest updated.
- O.P-1 is to issue a duplicate pass book to the complainant if O.P-2 does not make over original pass book within the period as aforesaid.
- O.P-1 to make payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and suffering caused to the complainant by him within a month of this order , failing which the compensation amount and the amount of cost as referred to above will bear interest @10% p.a till full realization thereof.
The orders under Serial nos. 2 and 3 are to be complied with by O.P no.1 within a month of this order, or else the complainant is at liberty to execute the award through the machinery of the Forum.
Let a free copy of this order be given to the parties concerned at once.
President
I / We agree
Member Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
