Tripura

Dhalai

CC/3/2023

Mrs. Sumitra Sinha. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Tripura State Co-Operative Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. S. S. Dasgupta.

30 Mar 2024

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

 KAMALPUR, DHALAI TRIPURA

PRESENT

SRI. S. D. SINGH

PRESIDENT

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                    KAMALPUR, DHALAI TRIPURA

&

Sri Jagannath Roy(Member)

&

Smt. Dipali Sinha(Member)

 CASE NO. 03 CC KMP  OF 2023

 Mrs. Sumitra Sinha

                                                          D/O Kabakno Sinha,

                                                         Resident of Baralutma,

                                                         P.S.:-Salema,

                                                          District:- Dhalai 799285 ..................Complainant,                                                                                                                                   

V E R S U S

 

                                  1). Tripura State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Kamalpur Branch

     PO and PS-Kamalpur

                                                                               District-Dhalai, 799285 .............. Opposite Parties.                                                                                        

                                                           C O U N S E L S

 

         Counsel for the Petitioner          :      Sri S.S. Dasgupta      .............Ld. Advocate.

         Counsel for the OP                     :       Smt. Lipi Kar  .......... Ld. Advocate.

                                                                                  

          Date of institution of the case                    :   05.06.2023

          Date of hearing final argument                 :   06.02.2024.

          Date of pronouncement of Judgment        :   30.03.2024.

 

                                                                                J U D G E M E N T

 

1.                This instant case was instituted on the basis of complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 filed by one Mrs. Sumitra Sinha.

        

2.                The complainant case in brief is that the complainant has Saving Bank Account bearing no. 002712010009705 at OP's Bank at Kamalpur Branch. Being proposed by OP and his Loan Project Manager namely Ashim Sinha, complainant had submitted a project prepared by opposite party's project manager Sri Ashim Sinha and accordingly OP approved and provided loan to the complainant to her bank account lying with OP in 3 phases i.e. firstly, Rs. 1,00,000/- on 31.12.2021, secondly, Rs. 1,00,000/- on 17.03.2022 and thirdly, Rs. 65,000/- on 26.04.2022 respectively. Complainant also added that the entry dated 31.12.2021 in  the passbook shows that an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been transferred to "Self" but on inquiry it is found that none of the complainant’s several account has received the said amount of money on the said date or any other several date. The complainant also stated that she neither made any instruction to Bank to transfer any amount to any of other account of self or other person respectively. Accordingly, complainant requested OP on several occasion to disclose the status of said money and passbook status showing "transferred to self" but OP till now did not inform the status of the said amount of money transferred or details on where the said money has been gone. The complainant lastly contacted with the OP regarding the aforesaid issue by Ld. Advocate letter dated 25.04.2023.

                   Being dissatisfied and aggrieved with the service of OP, the Complainant filed this Complaint U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and claimed Rs. 1,50,000/- (One Lakh Fifty Thousand) only alongwith interest @ 18% per annum on the award amount from the date of filling of complaint till its realisation as a compensation.

 

3.                On the other hand, Opposite Party also appeared and contested the suit by way of filing written reply. In the written reply the Opposite Party stated that the complainant had submitted a project prepared by project manager namely Sri Ashim Sinha & accordingly the OP approved principal loan amounting to Rs. 2,85,000/- which was disbursed in 3 parts which are Rs. 1,20,000/- on 21.12.2021, Rs. 1,00,000/- on 17.09.2022 and Rs. 65,000/- on 26.04.2022 total amounting to Rs. 2,85,000/-. OP further stated that it reveals from complainant statement that Rs. 1,00,000/- (One lakh) transferred to A/C No 00271010001077 in the A/C of Ashim Sinha as per complainant opinion and prayer of willingness with observing all formalities as no cheque facility was available with the complainant and subsequently complainant had withdrawn Rs. 1,00,000/- by cheque issued and signed by Ashim Sinha bearing cheque No. 13828 dated. 31.12.2021. OP denied any default in service or negligency in service and prays for dismissal of the instant complaint with cost upon the complainant.

 

4.                ISSUES/POINTS TO BE DETERMINED

 

         On 11.10.2023 the following issues has been framed for determination which are as follows:-

         i)  Is the complaint petition maintainable in its present form?

         ii)  Has the complainant any cause of action for the suit?

         iii) Is the complaint barred by limitation?

         iv) Whether there is any deficiency/ negligency on the part of the OP bank in providing services?

         v)  Whether the complainant had suffered any loss due to     acts done by the opposite party?

         vi) To what relief, if any, is the complainant entitled?

 

5.                Evidence adduced by the parties:

                   Complainant examined herself as PW1 and the witness was accordingly cross examined. She submitted original passbook of Tripura State Co-operative Bank Limited (exhibit-1) and photocopy of advocate notice to OP along with postal receipt.

                   Opposite Party also produced 2 witnesses namely Charampai Reang (Branch Manager) and Ashim Sinha (Businessman) who are examined as OPW-1 and OPW-2. Accordingly witnesses were cross-examined. OPW-1 submitted some documents which were marked as Exhibit which are as follows-

         Exhibit A- Computer generated account statement (3 pages) of Sumitra Sinha from 28.12.2021 to 26.06.2023.

         Exhibit B- Computer generated copy of statement (1 page) of Ashim Kumar Sinha from 30.12.2021 to 31.12.2021.

         Exhibit C- Photocopy of debit Voucher dated 31.12.2021 of Sumitra Sinha amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-.

         Exhibit D- Photocopy of credit Voucher dated 31.12.2021 of Ashim Kumar Sinha amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-.

         Exhibit E- Photocopy of Bearer Cheque in the name of Sumitra Sinha issued by Ashim Kumar Sinha dated 30.12.2021.

         Exhibit F- Photocopy of payment voucher dated 11.02.2022 amounting to Rs. 20,000/- having signature of account holder Sumitra Sinha.

         Exhibit G- Photocopy of payment voucher dated 22.02.2022 amounting to Rs. 20,000/- having signature of account holder Sumitra Sinha.

                                                Argument

6.                The complainant filed written argument on 24/01/2024 and  on the other hand the Ld. Advocate for the OP concluded argument  on 06/02/2024 by filing written argument.

         In the written argument of the complainant it is stated that OP Bank issued debit voucher of Rs. 1,00,000/- from complainant's account and issued credit voucher of Rs. 1,00,000/- in favour of project manager Ashim Sinha without consent of complainant. It is further stated in written argument that OP admitted in cross-examination that there is no written requisition from account holder for transferring Rs. 1,00,000/- from her account to the account of Ashim Sinha. It is also stated in written argument that there is no signature of the Branch Manager/ Accountant or of the complainant in the Debit Voucher and Credit Voucher. It is also stated that the cheque was issued on 30.12.2021 and amount was transferred on 31.12.2021 without any written requisition on behalf of account holder.

         It is stated in written argument of OP that claimant has two bank account where one is loan account bearing no. 002752513000110, and another is saving account bearing no. 002712010009705. The bank statement of complainant shows that the said amount was transferred from her own loan A/C no. 002752513000110 to her own Saving A/C no. 002712010009705 with consent of the complainant. It further stated that the account holder/complainant made her consent by putting her signature on debit voucher and credit voucher for the said transaction.  It is also stated that according to bank rule and regulation no signature of account holder in the front page of debit voucher is required. There is always signature of account holder in the back page of debit voucher. Exhibit F and Exhibit-G are the proof of signature of claimant. Thereafter on request of claimant, bank issued credit voucher in favour of Ashim Sinha and accordingly, on that date Rs. 1,00,000/- was credited in A/C No. 002710100001071.

 

7 .               DISCUSSION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:-

 

                   Before going to decide other issue or issues separately or simultaneously, it is necessary to decide issue No. (i) to (iii). Hence issue No. i, ii and iii are taken together for discussion and decision.        

         It reveals from the W/S of the Opposite party that OP did not dispute the maintainability of instant complaint rather in the last paragraph of W/S, the OP disputed the arising of cause of action. It is to be mention here that cause of action is a bundle of facts which forms the ground for a civil suit. The plaintiff must have to prima facie convince the court as to the existence of the facts relating to cause of action for the court to proceed with the suit. Cause of action is the foundation of a suit. It is the pivot on which the issues of the suit revolves. The cause of action must have occurred prior to the institution of the suit. The cause of action is basis of filing the suit. In the instant case it appears that the complainant communicated OP through advocate letter dated 25.04.2023 (Ld. Advocate Sri S.S. Dasgupta) but OP did not reply to the said letter and the instant case had been filed on 25.06.2023. So according to CP Act 2019, the instant complaint is not barred by limitation and there is also cause of action. The complainant is resident of Kamalpur and OP has also branch at Kamalpur. So the complaint petition is rightly maintainable before this forum. This forum has jurisdiction to entertain & adjudicate the dispute.

         Points no. (i), (ii) and (iii) are decided accordingly in favour of petitioner.

 

8.                Points no. (iv), (v) and (vi) are taken together for discussion and decision.

         The gist of the complaint is that complainant denied and disputed the debit voucher of Rs. 1,00,000/- dated 31.12.2021 transferred to the account of one project manager Ashim Sinha from her account without her consent.

          It reveals from cross-examination of Smt. Sumitra Sinha that she admitted that her project was prepared by Sri Ashim Sinha and she knows Ashim Sinha as a family friend.

9.                Now let me examine what is consent. We may find consent u/s 13 & 14 of Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 13 says that two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

          Section 14 say that consent is said to be free when it is not caused by-

(I) coercion,

(ii) undue influence,

(iii) fraud,

(iv) misrepresentation,

(v) mistake.

         Consent is said to be so caused when it would not have been given but for the existence of such coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake.

 

10.              Now the only question lies for determination in the instant case is that whether Bank Authority (OP) transferred an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- dated 31.12.2021 through debit voucher from the account of Sumitra Sinha to the account of Ashim Sinha without her consent?

         It is true that complainant has no cheque facility in the OP bank. Now come to the question whether the Bank authority can transfers amount from one’s A/C to another’s account where account holder has no cheque facility.

         It is not compulsory to have a cheque book to transfer money to other accounts using  NEFT or RTGS, nor is it necessary to have a passbook to withdraw money. One can transfer by using NEFT or RTGS through internet Banking, mobile banking, or by visiting the bank and filing out a funds transfer form.

         If someone has a complaint against the branch manager for any issue related to these service, he can raise the complaint through the bank’s official complaint redressal department including Customer Service department by submitting written complaint or online complaint.

         It reveals from the debit voucher (Exhibit-C) that the complainant put her signature in the back page of the voucher and it also reveals from the complaint & written argument of the complainant that she is a literate person.

         It is to mention here that the complainant raised her grievance on 25.04.2023 by sending advocate letter (Advocate Mr. S.S. Dasgupta) and the said transfer was made on 31.12.2021. It is claimed by complainant that she had requested bank authority on several occasion but this forum did not find any documentary evidence in this regard. If she has any grievance against the Bank regarding fund transfer from her account to another’s account without her consent, she should have lodged the complaint instantly rather to send an advocate letter after almost expiry of 28 months.

         Further it is to mention here that the complainant did not dispute and denied her signature in the debit voucher (Exhibit-C).

         The only question raised by Ld. Counsel of complainant that there is a overwriting in the debit voucher, exhibit-C. It is to be mentioned here that the Bank officials are not concerned with filing up the voucher slip and there is no any official mandate in this regard. Only concerned is verification and checking by Bank official, after which they transfer the amount as per voucher. So far as the evidence available on record it has surfaced that the consent of complaint had not been influenced by coercion, fraud, undue influence, misappropriation, mistake etc. The signature in the debit voucher itself proved the factum that the consent was valid.

         Furthermore, Ashim Sinha is a  family friend of complainant and so it can’t be said that the money was transferred to the account of unknown person. All such circumstances shows that Bank (OP’s) has nothing to do with the transfer of fund where the customer herself put signature in the voucher and money transferred in the name of his/her known person.

         It is to note here that why the cheque was given by Ashim Sinha to the complainant & whether Ashim Sinha returned Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant are not the facts which comes within the domain of Bank Services.

         If something has been done contrary to law by Ashim Sinha, the complainant is free to take the recourse of law before competent authority.

         After appreciation of evidence on record we hold that the OP is not liable for any deficiency or negligency in services.

         In view of the decisions arrived at issue no. (iv), (v) and (vi) is hereby decided in negative.

 

11.              Hence, it is,

                                                O-R-D-E-R

 

                   that in view of the discussion above, we are of the opinion that the OP bank, Tripura State Co-operative Bank Ltd, Kamalpur branch is not liable for any deficiency or negligency in services and thus the instant complaint is hereby dismissed having no merit without any cost.

 

12.              Thus, the case is accordingly disposed of on contest.      

 

13.              Supply copy of this judgment to both the parties free of costs.

14.              Return the exhibited documents after maintaining due procedure if any.

15.              Make necessary entry in the T/R.

 

                                               _A_N_N_O_U_N_C_E_D_

                  

 

                 (S. Deo Singh)

                         President

           District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal Commission, Kamalpur

                  (Sri J. Roy)

                     Member

      District Consumer Disputes

    Redressal Commission, Kamalpur

               (Smt. D. Sinha)

                    Member

      District Consumer Disputes

   Redressal Commission, Kamalpur