CONSUMER CASE No.- 57/2014
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
The case of complainant Sri Joy Kumar Namasudra, in brief, is that he opened a Savings bank account in Allahabad Bank, Jellalpore branch vide no. 8930 (old) and No.22475850986 (new). Further he has stated that in the said account he deposited Rs.70,000/- on 04/01/2011, an amount of Rs.10,000/- on 20/05/2011, Rs25,000/- on 13/06/2011, Rs.500/- on 18/09/2010, Rs.21,500/- 0n 25/09/2010 and an amount of Rs.25,000/- on 13/06/2012. That on 24/04/2014 the complainant went to the branch and after checking his account maintained by the O.P. bank found that the balance shows Rs. 5,547/- instead of Rs.1,84,458/-. Further statement of the complainant is that statement of his account shows numbers of withdrawals though he did not withdrew the said amount. Thereafter the complainant lodged a complaint with the O.P. bank for refund of amount after correction of his account but the O.P. No.-3 maintained silence in this respect. As a result, according to the complainant, there has been deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. bank and he has suffered irreparable financial loss. The complainant has, therefore, prayed for reliefs against the O.Ps.- such as. for payment of Rs. 1,84,458/- to the complainant, payment of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for loss and injury, payment of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and for cost of litigation etc.
The O.P. No. 3 has submitted joint written statement for himself as well as for other two O.Ps. stating, interalia, that there is no cogent reason for filing this complaint, that the claim is barred by limitation etc. In the W/S the answering bank admits that the complainant deposited Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 21,500/- on 20-05-2011 and 25-09-2010 respectively in the SB A/C which has been reflected in the ledger/Pass book/ Statement of account but has strongly denied the deposit of other 4(four) alleged transation. It is stated that the deposit slips submitted by the complainant are fake and were not issued by the authorized officer of the bank. It also has been claimed by the O.P. that the particulars inserted in the alleged deposit slip are insufficient, defective, inadequate and illegible. The assertion made by the complainant does not match the statement of his account. Under the above circumstances, according to the O.P. , the bank is not liable to make any payment to the complainant.
In support of the case the complainant submitted his evidence on affidavit as PW-1 and exihibited some documents. On the other hand, from the side of O.P. bank evidence on affidavit of Mr. L. Hangzo has been submitted as DW-1 alongwith exhibit. Written argument also have been submitted from both sides. It may not be out of place to mention here that on 22/01/2018 my learned predecessor delivered judgment in the case and disposed of the case in favour of the complainant. Thereafter the O.P. bank preferred appeal and the Hon’ble State Commission remanded the case back for cross-examination of the witnesses and thereafter to dispose of the case on merit. After receipt of the case record back cross-examination of the witnesses were held. Argument is heard. Now the case has come up for final disposal.
Though in the complaint petition the complainant brought allegations against the O.Ps that as many as 6 (six) transactions were not credited to his SB/ A/C but the contesting O.P has admitted that out of six transactions 2 (two) nos. of transactions of Rs.10,000/- on 20/05/2011 and Rs. 21,500/- on 25/09/2010. So no proof is required from the complainant that he deposited the said two amounts. Now it reveals from the evidence of PW-1 i.e., the complainant that during evidence he exhibited bank deposit folios in respect of deposit of Rs. 70,000/- on 04/01/2011 vide Ext.-2 and deposit of Rs.25,000/- on 13/06/2011 vide Ext.-2(1) . But during the course of cross-examination of PW-1 as well as in the evidence of DW-1 Exts.-2 & 2(1) have been strongly disputed so much so that the O.P. bank has taken the pleas that those two exhibits were not handed over to the complainant by any bank employee or cashier , that it does not contain the signature of the cashier, that in Ext.-2 there is overwriting , that the alleged amount was not recorded in the passbook by any bank employee, that the alleged entry is fake etc. etc. But there is no statement from the side of O.P. or any proof of the fact that the Exthibited folio slips do not belong to their bank and the impression of seal is fake. Moreover after careful scrutiny of Ext.-2 & 2(1) primafacie, it does not appear that those are not genuine. Simply the claim of DW-1 that in Ext.-A bank statement of the S/B account of the complainant there is no entry of those two deposits can not disprove the deposit of the alleged amount by the complainant vide those two exhibits. Moreover it reveals from the evidence of DW-1 that at the relevant time he was not posted in the concerned branch of the bank and it is his clear version that he has got no personal knowledge of the transactions. On the other hand he also has not stated clearly as to who was the cashier in work on the dates of deposit vide Exts. 2 & 2(1). Under the circumstances we are of considered opinion that the deposit of the amount of Rs.70,000/- vide Ext.-2 and amount of Rs. 25,000/- vide Ext.-2(1) by the complainant has been proved in the case.
Deposit of Rs.10,000/- on 20/05/2011 and Rs. 21,500/- on 25/09/2010 are admitted fact. Ext.-A statement of the complainant’s S/B account with the O.P. Bank also reflect those two deposits. Deposits of amount vide Exts.-2 & 2(1) are proven fact. So far as other deposits are concerned claimed by the complainant in the complaint in that respect there is no sufficient evidence in the case. Again it can also be said that though in the complaint petition the complainant has stated that his account shows withdrawal of a good number of amounts which were actually not withdrawn by him but that matter also has remained unproved .
In view of the above it is hold that the O.Ps. are jointly and severally liable to make credit of amount of Rs.70,000/- and 25,000/-totaling of Rs.95,000/- to the SB A/C of the complainant lying with them and to pay interest at the prevailing rate from the date of deposits and it is ordered accordingly. As the O.P made anomalies for making credit entry of the genuine deposits, so it caused disservice towards the complainant alongwith causing of mental agony, pain & harassment to the complainant and for that the O.Ps. are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant and it is ordered for payment accordingly. The O.Ps. are further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 10,000/- ( Rupees ten thousand ) towards cost of litigation. The entire process of crediting the deposited amount alongwith interest and payment of compensation etc. shall be completed within a period of 90 ( ninety) days from today else interest @ 9 percent per annum shall accrue on the total awarded amount from the date of judgment till payment.
With the above relief this case stands disposed of on contest . Given under our seal and signature on this the 22nd day of May, 2023.
