SATISH CHAND GOSIAN Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that complainant No.1 Satish Chand Gosian is husband of complainant No. 2 Smt. Pratibha Gosian. Both are residents of Faridabad. They had opened a fixed deposit account of Rs.8,50,000 on 18.1.1998 with the respondent bank for a period of 13 months and the FDR was to mature on 18.2.1999. However, the respondent did not deliver the FDR to the complainants.

(2.) IT was next averred that complainant No. 1 Sh. Satish Chand Gosian was having saving account No. 24055 since 1992 in addition to the current account and used to visit the bank frequently for operating the account and the entire staff of the bank knew him personally as he was reputed client of the bank having heavy deposits in his account running into crores.

(3.) IT was next averred that complainant No. 1 was having a company with the name and style of Securico Electronics India Limited and Sh. R.M. Pathak (according to respondent it was R.K. Pathak) was also working as a Senior Finance Manager of the said company. He was not given any authority to operate the personal bank account of complainant No. 1 but being MD of the company he (complainant No. 1) had given letter dated 9.9.1996 Annexure P -l to the respondentbank that R.M. Pathakwas working as Senior Finance Manager with the company since 8.7.1996.