Case nº Revision Petition No. 588 of 2011 of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, June 07, 2013 (case Cuttack Gramya Bank and Anr. Vs Benguli Sasmal)

JudgeFor Appellant: Mr. Rajesh Ratan, Advocate and For Respondents: Ex parte
PresidentV.B. Gupta, J. (Presiding Member) and Rekha Gupta, Member
Resolution DateJune 07, 2013
Issuing OrganizationNational Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


Rekha Gupta, Member

  1. Revision Petition No. 588 of 2011 has been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (short, 'Act') against the impugned order dated 13.11.2009, passed by Orissa State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Cuttack (short, "State Commission") in CD. First Appeal No. 750/2007. Brief facts of the case as per respondent/complainant are that the respondent/complainant for the safe custody of her surplus income opened a Savings Bank Account No. 3854 on 7.9.1999 in the Sankhatras Branch of Cuttack Gramya Bank, on depositing a sum of Rs. 500 for the first instance and went on operating the account till 15.11.1999 on which date the respondent deposited a sum of Rs. 25,000 and she was granted a valid and proper receipt by the petitioners/opposite parties in token of her such deposit.

  2. As on 15.11.1999, a sum of Rs. 26,617 was shown outstanding in the respondent's savings account and the same was also duly recorded by the petitioners in the Savings Bank Pass Book, granted to the respondent.

  3. While the matter so stood some times during March, 2000, the petitioners took away from the respondent the Savings Bank Pass Book and the counterfoil receipt granted to her on 15.11.1999 for the purpose of verification and investigation on the allegations of fraud practised by its employees i.e. the Field Officer, the Cashier and the Peon of the Bank for which investigation was going on by the local police on the FIR lodged to that effect. The respondent handed over the Pass Book and counterfoil in receipt to the petitioners without any objections.

  4. Thereafter, the respondent could not operate the Bank Account for years together for want of Pass Book. Despite repeated approaches of the respondent, the petitioners did not return back the Pass Book and the counterfoil receipt on the pleas that investigation is still going on. Only sometime during the year 2005, the petitioners finally returned back the counterfoil receipt and the Pass Book but surprisingly the petitioners did not allow the respondent to operate the account and to withdraw any amount from the account As the respondent was refused to withdraw any money from her Savings Bank Account, the respondent was forced to incur loans from local persons on payment of high interest to meet her bare necessaries and, therefore, suffered material loss, mental agony and harassments of irreparable nature.

  5. Besides the savings amounts which the respondent deposited in her Savings Bank Account, the respondent also had kept a sum of Rs. 20,658 as fixed deposit and she was also given a fixed deposit certificate by the petitioners.

  6. The petitioner No. 2 in consideration of the urgent need of the respondent allowed her on 5.9.2006 to operate the Saving Bank Account No. 3854 by depositing the encashed Fixed Depositing amount of Rs. 20,658 in the aforementioned Account No. 3854, whereafter the respondent had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 20,000. In spite of the demands of the respondent to show the balance in her Pass Book including Rs. 25,000 which the respondent deposited validly and properly on 15.11.1999, the petitioner No. 2 expressed his helplessness and inabilities on the grounds of pendency of litigation in the Court for the fraud committed by its employee.

  7. On 11.9.2006, though the respondent again approached the petitioner No. 2 to allow to withdraw Rs. 10,000 from her savings money, the petitioner No. 2 refused the same, on the ground that the deposit of Rs. 25,000 made on 15.11.1999 has not yet been taken into the account and to the ledger for which no withdrawal is to be allowed.

  8. Petitioners/opposite parties in their written statement before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Cuttack (short, 'District Forum') denied all/oil the facts mentioned in the complaint and stated as follows:

  9. The submissions made in different paragraphs of the aforesaid consumer dispute cases are false and fabricated. With regard to the submissions made in different paragraphs of the aforesaid Consumer Disputes cases, it is humbly submitted that the respondent has opened a Saving Bank Account bearing No. 3854 in petitioner No. 2's Branch on 5.9.1998 (not on 7.9.1999 as stated by the respondent).

  10. After opening the said account in the petitioner No. 2's Branch, the respondent has also made transactions in the said account. A sum of Rs. 3,117.00 only was available in her Savings Bank Account as on 11.9.1999. Thereafter, since the said respondent has "withdrawn a sum of the Rs. 1,500 from the said account on 15.10.1999, leaving behind a sum of Rs. 1,167 in the said account as on that date.

    District Forum passed the following Order:

    Having come to a conclusion that there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps., we direct that the OP-2 should correct the Pass Book of the complainant showing balance of Rs. 26,617 as on 9.5.2006 with 6% interest and accordingly, regularize the other entries and allow the complainant to withdraw the amount as and when desired by her. Further, the O.Ps. are to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000 to the complainant towards compensation and Rs. 500 towards litigation expenses within one month from the date of this order.

  11. Aggrieved by order of the District Forum, the petitioners filed an appeal before the State Commission. State Commission concluded as...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT