SAGNU RAM KOTHARI Vs. DENA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS all these appeals involve common questions they are being disposed of by this common order. These appeals arise from the orders in the complaint cases as detailed below:

(2.) UNDISPUTABLY , the complainants/appellants had savings Bank accounts or fixed deposit accounts with respondent Dena Bank. According to the complainants, different amounts were in balance in the said accounts. However, respondent Bank refused to repay the amounts to the complainants, on the false pretext that there was embezzlement of amount in collusion with the employee of the respondent Bank Madan Mohan Dwivedi and other officer of the Bank. The complainants, therefore, prayed that the amounts in balance in their savings Bank accounts or fixed deposits be directed to be refunded to them with interest thereon.

(3.) THE complaints were resisted by the respondent Bank. In substance, the stand of the respondent Bank was that the complainants colluded with Madan Mohan Dwivedi and other officer of the bank, and had withdrawn much more amount than was deposited in their accounts. It was alleged that Madan Mohan Dwivedi was permitting the complainants and other account holders to withdraw the amount by indulging in underhand dealings and colluding with the account holders. It was, therefore, averred that the complainants were not entitled to get any amount from the respondent Bank.