Haryana

Karnal

CC/210/2019

Randeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bank Of Baroda - Opp.Party(s)

Balvinder Singh

17 Jan 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KARNAL.

 

                                                                       Complaint No.210 of 2019

                                                                     Date of instt.19.04.2019

                                                                     Date of Decision 17.1.2020

 

Randeep Singh son of Shri Bharat Singh, resident of Kamboj Mohalla, VPO Kunjpura, Tehsil and District Karnal.                                                                                                                       …….Complainant

                                                Versus

 

1.      Bank of Baroda, Branch G.T. Road, Panipat Haryana Pincode 132103, branch Code 132822 through its Manager, through its authorised signatory.

2.      State Bank of India Branch Nissing, VPO Nissing, Branch Code 16254, District Karnal through its Branch Manager.

3.      Bank of Baroda, 628, G.T. Road, Sector-5, Karnal, through its Regional Manager.

 

                                                                           …..Opposite Parties.

Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.    

 

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.         

               Shri Vineet Kaushik….Member

     Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

         

Present:     Shri Balvinder Singh, counsel for complainant.

                   Shri Vikas Bakshi, counsel for OPs No.1 and 3.

                   Shri Pardeep Gupta, counsel for OP No.2.

 

                   Vide this order, we shall dispose of two applications for dismissal of complaint being filed beyond limitation one filed by Ops No.1 and 3 and another by OP No.2.

2.                Combined brief facts of the both the applications are that after going through the contents of the complaint, it has been revealed that the transaction pertains to the year 2016 whereas the present complaint has been filed in the year 2019. As per Consumer Laws, a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act has to be filed within two years from the date of cause of action. In the present complaint, the cause of action has arose in the year 2016 and the present complaint has been filed in the year 2019, therefore, the present complaint is time barred and same is liable to be dismissed.

3.                In reply, learned counsel for complainant averred that the present application has been filed just to prolong the case. As a matter of fact, the amount of ₹1,00,000/- was deposited in the account on 15.11.2016 and same was credited in the account but later on it was found that the same was debited from the account without intimation to the account holder. The complainant had obtained the account statement from the respondent on 5.4.2018 and the above said fact was revealed. It was not out of place to mention here that Rishi Kumar Sharma, Branch Manager, SBI had appeared in one of the case U/s 138 of N.I. Act and made a statement that no amount of ₹1,00,000/- was deposited on 15.11.2016 and this statement was made on 8.6.2018. The officials from the Bank of Baroda also appeared in the witness box and made the statement on 9.8.2018 that ₹1,00,000/- was not deposited in the account.

4.                We have heard the arguments on the applications by all the counsel and have gone through the case file. As per the version of the complainant, he had issued a cheque of ₹1,00,000/- on 15.11.2016 in favour of Puran Chand. The said cheque was deposited in the loan account of Bimla Prem Chand on the same day. The amount of ₹1,00,000/- was debited from the account of complainant by OP No.1 and the same was credited in the account of Bimla Prem Chand by OP No.2 on 18.11.2016 but later on said amount again debited from the account of Bimla Prem Chand by OP No.2 and there is deficiency on the part of the OPs.

5.                As per the bank statement placed on record by the complainant alleged amount of ₹1,00,000/- was debited from the account of the complainant on 18.11.2016. Thereafter, there are many transactions in the account of the complainant and till the date of filing of complaint i.e. 19.4.2019, the complainant has not raised any objection in this regard.

6.                The OP No.2 i.e. SBI filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against Bimla Devi wife of Prem Chand before the learned Special Court and the same has been decided on 8.9.2018 before the National Lok Adalat.

7.                As per Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.

8.                The cause of action in the present case has arisen in the year 2016 and the present complaint has been filed in the year 2019 i.e. after the gap of three years. The complainant has not filed any application for condonation of delay. Hence, we are of the considered view that the present complaint is barred by limitation. Accodingly, dismissed.  The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced:
Dated:17.1.2020  

 

(Vineet Kaushik)    (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)             President,  

       Member                 Member                        District Consumer Disputes 

                                                                                Redressal Forum,