PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. PRAN GAURI SURENDRABHAI THAKORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This First appeal under Sec. 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is directed by the appellants against the judgment and decree passed in special civil suit No. 278/1979 by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Nadiad dated 31.12.1984 under which the suit of the plaintiff- respondent was partly decreed. The order of dismissal of the husband of the plaintiff-respondent from the services was declared to be null and void, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. A decree for Rs. 80,219-50 and costs of the suit together with interest at the rate of 6% on principal amount has also been passed in favour of the plaintiff- respondent.

(2.) The facts of the case are to be taken in nutshell for the purpose of appreciating the contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties, which are as under: The plaintiff, respondent herein, is a widow of late Surendrabhai Thakorelal Thakore, who was in service of the appellant, Punjab National Bank. He was to retire from the bank services in the year 1971 but the extension in his services was granted. He was holding the post of Officer on Special Duty at Cambay Branch of the appellant-bank. The husband of the plaintiff-respondent was due for his retirement from the services after completion of the extended period on 6.11.1973. He was given chargesheet on 8.6.1973 for alleged grave and serious misconduct committed during his tenure as Bank Officer to give effect to the objectives of Bank Nationalisation Schemes he has made agricultural advances to agriculturist residing in the village concerned. An F.I.R has been lodged in the C.B.I against the husband of the plaintiff-respondent and after investigation of the matter, a chargesheet has been submitted against him and Sarpanch Maganbhai under Sec. 120B, 420, 477-A of Indian Penal Code and under Sec. 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The case was registered as Special Case No. 10/1977. The husband of the plaintiff-respondent was placed under suspension on 15.6.1972 and-he was served with a show cause notice dated 11.10.1973 to which the reply was submitted on 28.10.1973. He was given a chargesheet for the departmental inquiry on 18.6.1973 and he was dismissed from the services vide order dated 24.10.1973. Further order has been passed for forfeiture of gratuity and bank's contribution to provident fund etc. The criminal case against the husband of the plaintiff-respondent was decided on 18.8.1977 and he was acquitted. The Sarpanch was convicted for the offence as alleged against him . It is unfortunate that after acquittal he has expired on 26.8.1977. The plaintiff- respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal has arisen and the learned Trial Court decreed the suit as stated in the opening para of the judgment. Hence, this appeal before this Court by the appellants.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants made two fold contentions in this appeal. It is contended that the widow of the delinquent officer has no right to file the civil suit challenging there in the dismissal of her husband from the services of the bank. It has next been contended that the misconduct of the delinquent officer resulted in heavy monetary loss to the Bank which amount could have been recovered from the dues payable i.e., by withholding of gratuity etc., and contribution of employees toward the provident fund. The Court below has committed serious error in passing the decree in favour of the plaintiff-respondent.