D S SACHAR Vs. PUNJAB AND SIND BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order dated 17.1.2003 of Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh dismissing appeal against the order dated 7.6.2002 of a District Forum whereby complaint filed by the petitioner/complainant was dismissed.

(2.) COMPLAINT was filed, interalia, alleging that petitioner was having current account No. 2355 at Phase V, SAS Nagar, Mohali Branch of the respondent/opposite party-Bank. On 6.4.1999, petitioner alongwith his wife visited the said branch to deposit Rs.45,000/- in the said current account. This amount was part of the sale proceeds of a plot which the petitioner had sold. At about 1.45p.m. when petitioner was at the counter, someone snatched the money from his hand and despite his raising loud alarm and chasing, the snatcher fled away on a scooter standing outside the premises of bank with engine on. At the time of incident, there was no security guard/gunman present at the entry/exit gate of the bank. Collapsible doors of the main gate were not chained. It was further alleged that bank authorities failed to sound the siren alarm. Petitioner had suffered loss of amount of Rs.45,000/-. Direction was sought to the respondent-bank to pay the said amount with interest at the rate of Rs. 18% per annum as also Rs. 15,000/- by way of compensation for the harassment and mental agony caused.

(3.) MAINTAINING of current account No. 2355, petitioner visiting the Branch on 6.4.1999 and informing D.S. Chawla, Branch Manager of the incident of snatching of money are not in dispute. From the unrebutted affidavit filed by way of evidence by the petitioner, it is proved that he was having Rs. 45,000/- for being deposited in the said current account which money was snatched inside the bank premises by a miscreant, who was successful in fleeing away with money despite alarm being raised and chasing by the petitioner. Thus, the sole point which arises for determination in present case is whether liability for payment of money can be legally fastened on respondent-bank on ground of it being deficient in service under Section 2(i)(o) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986(for short the Act). Alongwith reply to the application dated 26.2.2001 (copy at pages 37-38), the petitioner had filed security guidelines, Check List issued by Reserve Bank of India before the District Forum. Abstract therefrom is placed at pages 50-55. Para No. 4 thereof under the heading 'Duties of Bank Guards' which is relevant is reproduced below :-