UCO BANK Vs. SAMBHU PRASAD DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an Appeal directed against the judgement and order dt. 30.1.08 passed by the Darjeeling District Consumer Forum at Siliguri in its Consumer Case No. 84/S/2007 directing the OP/Appellant to make payment of Rs. 4,23,500/ - together with cost of Rs. 300/ -. Being aggrieved by the said judgement and order the present Appeal has been preferred.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly are that the Complainant/Respondent opened an account under Loghu Bachat Yojana being No. 4215/1 on 5.9.02 with the Appellant/Bank. The maturity of the said account was 63 months. The Respondent used to pay diverse sums into the said account from time to time depending on his financial position. The amounts so contributed by the Respondent used to be deposited in his account by the Area Agent of the Bank, Mr. Pradip Kr. Sarkar, who used to verify the Pass Book and also got it countersigned by the bank officer. The Pass Book was verified upto 25.5.07 and the total deposited amount as per the Pass Book stood at Rs. 4,18,500/ -. The Respondent on hearing a rumour that the agent of the Appellant -Bank was not depositing the money in the Bank collected under the scheme, he visited the Bank on 28.5.07 and came to know that as per the ledger account there was a credit balance of Rs. 2,84,700/ - in his account under the said scheme though he had deposited a total amount of Rs. 4,18,500/ -. The Respondent lodged a complaint with the Branch Manager regarding the said anomaly alleging that Shri Pradip Kr. Sarkar, the agent of the Bank, misappropriated a large chunk of money deposited to his account on various dates. It is also stated that the said agent, Shri Sarkar, privately admitted such defalcation. However, the bank did not lodge any FIR with the police against Shri Sarkar. Being aggrieved by the non -cooperative attitude on the part of the Bank he filed the dispute before the Forum below.

(3.) THE Appellant -Bank in their written version filed before the Forum below admitted all the facts excepting the allegation of defalcation by its agent. The Appellant also contended before the Forum below that a loan of Rs. 1,20,000/ - had been taken by the Respondent against the said LBY account. It also contended that the balance in the said account was only Rs. 2,36,000/ - as on 30.6.06, while the Respondent contended that the balance of Rs. 4,18,500/ - as shown in the Pass Book. The Pass Book was countersigned by the Bank on several dates, which are 30.4.03, 15.12.03, 31,5,03, 26.9.05, 31.1.06 and 30.11.06. The Appellant contended that the Ld. Forum passed the above order without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and, therefore, the order is illegal and not tenable in law. It has, therefore, come up with the prayer that the impugned order of the Forum below dt. 30.1.08 be set aside.