STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. SAHOO BROTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner (bank). He submits, impugned is award dtd. 27/7/2016, by which the Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) held, his client had committed gross negligence in taking of the policy and ordered his client to pay Rs.5.00 lakhs to its constituent, opposite party no.1.

(2.) He submits further, clause (b) in sec. 22A of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 does not include as 'public utility service', banking. He also draws attention to prayers made by opposite party no.1 before the PLA to demonstrate there was no claim made against his client. As such, he submits, impugned award is clearly without jurisdiction and liable to and should be set aside and quashed.

(3.) Mr. Rao, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party no.1 and submits, his client obtained credit facility from the bank by hypothecating his stock. The bank debited his client's account on insurance premium, for insuring the stock. The bank committed error in giving particulars of address of the stockyard. As a result, claim made upon theft of stock was repudiated by the insurance company. On query from Court he submits, value of the stock insured was at Rs.63.00 lakhs.