HDFC BANK LIMITED Vs. PIONEER SALES NETWORK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act') is directed against the order dtd. 25/10/2018 of the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (in short, 'the State Commission') in complaint no. 184 of 2018 whereby the State Commission has allowed the complaint.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the material on record. Delay of 162 days in filing the appeal was condoned vide order dtd. 2/8/2019 subject to appellant depositing Rs.20,000.00 with the Consumer Legal Aid Account of this Commission.

(3.) The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the respondent which is a proprietorship firm registered under the provisions of Himachal Pradesh VAT Act, 2005, situated at Guruji Building, near Fire Station, Sector 3, Parwanoo, District Solan (HP) had obtained an Over Draft Account no. 13072790000045 with the appellant Bank. On 10/3/2016 and 14/3/2016 the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (in short, 'the DETC'), Flying Squad, South Zone, Parwanoo served a notice under Sec. 27 of the Himachal Pradesh VAT Act upon the appellant directing it to pay Rs.1.00 crore or a lessor amount available in the said account or any other account of the complainant towards the outstanding dues of the respondent. On 11/3/2016, without instructions of the respondent, a sum of Rs.9,78,3903.00 and thereafter sums of Rs.4,05,000.00 on 15/3/2016, Rs.2,00,000.00 on 16/3/2016 and Rs.1,11,176.00 were transferred from the said account of the respondent to the DETC. The respondent served a legal notice dtd. 18/3/16 on the appellant requesting reversal of the debited amount and to reduce the OD limit. She also requested the DETC not to direct the Banks to transfer the funds from her OD account or Cash Credit limit, in response to which the appellant, vide reply dtd. 28/3/2016, denied the allegations and stated that the funds were transferred in due compliance of legal notice of the Government of Himachal Pradesh. A sum of Rs.3527.00 was again transferred by the Bank to the DETC on 24/5/2016. According to the appellant, in the absence of directions by it, this amounted to deficiency of service. Hence, the respondent approached the State Commission which, on contest, by way of the impugned order directed: