SUNDER LAL Vs. SYNDICATE BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), against order dated 24.11.1997, passed by District Forum-II, in Complaint Case No.853/96 entitled Shri Sunder Lal V/s. The Manager, Syndicate Bank, Connaught Circus, New Delhi and Another.

(2.) The facts of the case relevant for the disposal of this appeal, in brief, are that the appellant Shri Sunder Lal had a Saving Bank Account No.44245 with respondent No.1, Syndicate Bank, Connaught Circus, New Delhi and there was a balance of Rs.26,361.75 in the above said account. The appellant needed some money and for withdrawing the same from his account he presented a withdrawal slip before the Bank but he was informed by the Bank official that there was less amount of money in his account than what he wanted to withdraw. On inquiry the appellant was told that a sum of Rs.3,500/- was withdrawn from his account on 23.11.1995, another sum of Rs.8,000/- was withdrawn on 25.11.1995 and another sum of Rs.13,000/- was withdrawn on 27.11.1995. All these withdrawals were through withdrawal slips. The case of the complainant before the District Forum was that before payment on the basis of withdrawal slip it should be accompanied by Pass Book. However, in disregard of this rule the staff of OP No.1 made the payments on the basis of withdrawal slip though the Pass Book did not accompany the same, which was actually in the possession of the appellant. The appellant complained about it to the Manager of the Syndicate Bank but the officials misbehaved with him and threatened him with dire consequences. The matter was reported to the police at Connaught Place Police Station. The appellant also sent a legal notice to the O. Ps. and when nothing was done he filed a complaint before the District Forum alleging deficiency in Service on the part of OP No.1 and claimed a sum of Rs.81,650/- including compensation and damages, besides the money wrongly paid by the respondent on the basis of withdrawal slips.

(3.) The respondents did not appear before the District Forum and the case proceeded ex parte against them before the District Forum However, after considering evidence produced by the appellant, the learned District Forum passed the impugned order. The operative portion of the same reads as under: "the complainant has also stated that he has already reported the matter to the Police. Police must be investigating the genuineness or otherwise of the claim of the complainant. Under the circumstances, it is ordered that in case it is found by the police that the complainant did not withdraw his money on 23.11.1995 (Rs.3,500/-) on 25.11.1995 (Rs.8,000/-) and on 27.11.1995 (Rs.13,000/-), the O. P. shall refund this whole amount to the complainant along with interest at the usual Bank rate considering that the money was never withdrawn and shall also pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as costs and compensation. In case it so found, the O. P. shall be at liberty to realise the amount from the person to whom it was wrongly delivered. In case however the police finds that the complainant had withdrawn the money through the above stated three withdrawal slips, the complaint would stand dismissed. A copy of this order be sent to both the parties by post. "