SURESH KUMAR PANJWANI Vs. STATE BANK OF INDORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against order dated 16.5.2008, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called as "District Forum" for short) in Complaint Case No. 176/2007, whereby the complaint of the appellant has been dismissed on the ground that it is not maintainable before the Consumer Redressal Forum.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the complainant was having a saving bank account with the respondent, with facility of ATM and cheque book. As per the case of the complainant, somebody has withdrawn Rs. 33,000 from his account without his knowledge on the basis of a cheque. It has been alleged by the complainant that the cheque was not bearing his signature and without comparing his signature from the standard signature, sample of which was provided to the bank, amount was paid to the third party and thereby deficiency has been committed by the respondent. Whereas, the case of the respondent bank was that a fresh cheque book was got issued by the complainant, on the ground that earlier cheques have been misplaced. It has been alleged that with conspiracy of someone else, complainant himself has withdrawn the amount by a cheque through third person.

(3.) AFTER hearing arguments of both parties and perusing record of the District Forum, it becomes clear that the matter in respect of forgery and cheating is still pending for investigation before Police and no conclusion has been drawn by the Police either in favour or against the complainant. Complaint was lodged to the Police by the complainant himself and is being investigated. The papers and other materials for deciding the controversies between the parties, are also with the Police and have not been produced. In view of these facts, the complaint of the complainant appears pre -mature and without any sufficient material and is liable to be dismissed on this ground with a liberty to file the same again as and when the complainant is informed in respect of result of the investigation of the case pending before Police. So far as finding of the District Forum is concerned that the disputes between the parties cannot be adjudicated by the Consumer Forum because of allegation of forgery and cheating, we find that no finding in this regard can also be recorded at this stage. It is true that both parties have alleged forgery against each other. As per case of the complainant, the Bank employees in conspiracy with third party have withdrawn the amount, whereas the Bank says that it was the complainant who was in conspiracy with the third party and had withdrawn the amount. This allegation shows that so far as the question of withdrawal of amount by third party is concerned, there is no dispute between the parties. Now all which have to be seen is as to whether cheque, which has been encashed, was bearing signature of the complainant or not and whether by encashing cheque not bearing signature of the complainant, employees of the bank have committed deficiency in service or not. This controversy can be resolved by examination of signature on the original cheque by some expert. A similar exercise is being done by the Police and we have already held that complaint is pre -mature, so no further opinion on this question is necessary at this stage.