CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA Vs. BANSAL BROTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE responds although notices have been sent to the parties on occasions more than one. Since it is an old appeal of 1994, we consider it appropriate to decide it on merit.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17. 3.1994 whereby the complaint of the respondent was allowed with a direction to the Central Bank of India to refund the amount of Rs. 18,318.96 which had been debited to the respondent's account.

(3.) ACCORDING to the respondent/complainant the firm was not under an obligation to pay the commission or any kind of fee to the bank on behalf of the consignors of the bills received through the bank. The bank did not deny about its agreement with the firm that the commission on the bills received from the other business establishments would be charged from the concerned business concern. In case the bank omitted to do so or forgot due to inadvertence of the employees or otherwise to levy such fees or realize commission from the consignors, the bank has to suffer for its follies. In other words the bank cannot be permitted to saddle the respondent firm with any liability of making payment of the commission or the fees on behalf of others. Moreover, the bank failed to furnish the details of such commission/fees and did not file the same even though the District Consumer Forum had specifically asked for such details. In these circumstances, the bank's action to debit the entire amount of commission/fees in the account of the respondent firm was certainly a wrong act which would amount to deficiency in service. In nutshell it may be observed that the bank had realized the amount of commission or fees from the respondent firm for which the latter was not liable. It is clearly borne out from the record that long after dealing with such individual several transactions, the bank realized during its routine audit that the commission could not be accounted for. Whether it was a mistake or an omission, the respondent firm could not have been penalized. According to the terms and conditions of the agreement between the two such commission was leviable against the other parties or business concerns dealing with the complainant. We are, therefore, of the decisive opinion that the judgment in appeal is just, legal and reasonable and does not call for any interference. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.