CHHATTISGARH GRAMIN BANK Vs. SURENDRA KUMAR BORKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 30.8.2010, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raigarh (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short) in Complaint Case No.36/10, whereby the complaint of respondent No. 1 was allowed against the appellant and the appellant was directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5,000 along with cost of Rs. 1,000 within a period of one month from the date of order otherwise to pay the amount along with interest @ 12% p.a.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that respondent No.1/complainant was working in Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank. Branch, Bade Bhandar. He was having a Savings Bank Account and Recurring Deposit Account in that Branch. It is also not in dispute that on 20.2.2010, he produced a withdrawal form for withdrawing Rs. 11,000 from his Savings Bank Account, then the Bank informed him that his both the accounts have already been transferred to Lenghra Branch of the Bank. Contention of the complainant before District Forum was that he was having a balance of Rs. 1,03,867.40 p. in his both accounts and at the relevant time he was not well on account of some injury in his leg and was taking rest in his home. He was in need of money for his treatment and for his domestic expenditure. That is why, he produced a withdrawal slip before the Bank and then only he was informed that his accounts have been transferred to another branch. It is alleged that the Bank has committed deficiency in service in transferring his accounts to another Branch without his consent and in not encashing his withdrawal form. With these allegations consumer complaint was filed before District Forum.

(3.) IN reply, the appellant Bank refuted the allegations of deficiency in service and averred that the complainant was in fact working on the post of Branch Manager at Bade Bhandar Branch of the Bank and was transferred vide order dated 9.2.2010 to Lenghra Branch of the Bank. As per usual procedure of the Bank and as per directions of the Higher Office, his accounts were also required to be transferred to that Branch immediately, that is why the accounts of the complainant were also transferred to Lenghra Branch, where he was transferred and in doing so, no deficiency in service has been committed. It has also been averred that the complainant does not come in the category of 'consumer' in view of the fact that he was having accounts in the Bank and he was an employee of that Bank also, so he was getting extra benefits, in the form of higher rate of interest than other depositors, in those accounts. Thus, it was a dispute between employer and employee and is outside the scope of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.