NAIMA RASOOL Vs. JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER dated 20.5.2008 passed by the learned Divisional Consumer Protection Forum, Srinagar,(hereinafter to be referred to as the Forum), has been taken in this appeal. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.11.2007, the appellant herein filed complaint before the Forum with allegations that withdrawals shown from 15.12.2006 to 4.4.2007 totalling Rs. 2,80,000 were made clandestinely and fraudulently by some body from her SB A/C No. 36597.That OP No. 2 was responsible to maintain the account in a fair and correct manner. She had been kept in dark about the above stated withdrawals as no statement of accounts had been issued by the Bank in her favour till 27.9.2007. That during the above stated period she had neither issued any cheque in favour of any person nor authorised any person to withdraw any amount in any manner from the said account. The respondent in their written version had taken the plea that alleged withdrawals were matter of record but when the appellant approached respondent No. 2, accompanied by her father and sister, he had immediately shown them the record of her saving account number and all of them had agreed and accepted the genuineness of withdrawal forms including the signatures of the appellant appended thereon. According to respondents a false and vexatious complaint has been filed against them. It was also alleged that complicated questions of fact and law were involved in the case, which could not be adjudicated in a summary manner in the Forum. On the last legal objection, the Forum heard the arguments of the Counsel of the parties and held that complicated questions of fact and law were involved. Accordingly the complaint was dismissed with an observation that appellant was at liberty to invoke the jurisdiction of a civil Court for redressal of her grievances.

(2.) IN the memo of appeal, the main ground urged for over -setting the impugned order is that the learned Forum had the jurisdiction to try the complaint because the dispute was of such a summary nature, which could be adjudicated under the benevolent provisions of the Act which is a socialistic piece of legislation enacted for the benefits of bona fide consumers for getting cheap and speedy justice at their door while following the principles of natural justice. Heard the arguments.

(3.) MR . Shalla, the Counsel of the appellant, while reiterating the grounds of the memo of appeal, in addition has cited the case of CCI Chambers Co -op Hsg. Society Ltd. v. Development Credit Bank Ltd., 2004 AIR(SC) 184 and urged that ratio decided of the case may be followed as it applies in all fours to the facts of the present case. In rebuttal the agent of the respondents namely Mufti Mubashir has submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings, the respondents initiated an internal administrative inquiry to arrive at the truth. That specimen signatures of the complainant, which in normal banking practice were kept in the record of the Bank, along with alleged disputed signatures appended on the "withdrawal forms" were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory,Srinagar for comparison and in good faith, on 12.11.2008 written complaint was also lodged in the concerned police station. With permission of the Commission, he produced that record by way of documentary evidence. He has referred to the FSL report dated 19.8.2008 in order to prove his contention that complaint is false as it is recorded in the report that the record submitted for comparison of disputed signatures had "common authorship". That the documentary evidence which now has been provided in the appeal record clearly establishes the fact that complaint is based on false and concocted accusations.