DILBAG SINGH S/O HARI SINGH Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & 3 ORS ; MONEESH KUMAR CASHIER; ANIL KUMAR BHATIA, BRANCH MANAGER; J S SAGGU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner/ Complainant against the impugned order dated 05.11.2015 passed by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short, 'State Commission') in Appeal No.96 of 2015.

(2.) Facts of the case as per the Petitioner/Complainant are, being a senior citizen and pensioner he had two accounts (1) Saving Bank Account No.0383000100576920 (2) Pension Account No. 038000100472174 in the Respondents/Opposite Parties' Bank. The first joint account number was in the name of petitioner and his daughter namely Paramjit Kaur while the second account number was in the name of petitioner only. It is alleged that on 16.2.2012, petitioner deposited Rs. 49,000/- two times in the A/C No. No.0383000100576920 in the respondents' bank and the bank also made two entries of Rs. 49,000/- in the passbook and in this way, the petitioner deposited Rs. 98,000/- in the bank of the respondent and also received the receipt from the bank. On the same day, i.e. 16.02.2012, petitioner also deposited Rs. 49,000/-, entries of the same had been shown in the receipt, which is in his possession, but the respondents had not entered the said amount of Rs. 49,000/- in the passbook of the petitioner's account no.038000100472174. The petitioner requested the opposite parties to make the entry of Rs. 49,000/- in the account no. 038000100472174 but they failed to do so rather they forcibly pushed the petitioner out from the bank and did not pay any heed to his request. The petitioner also made a written request on 15.04.2014 to the Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Sector-17, Chandigarh for recovery of Rs. 49,000/- along with interest, compensation and harassment. This complaint was forwarded to the Nodal Officer of the respondents' bank at Phagwara on 25.3.2014. The petitioner also filed a separate application to the Nodal Officer regarding the matter, as he was not aware of the complaint, but to no effect. Hence, a consumer complaint was filed by the petitioner before the District Forum against the respondents praying therein that opposite parties may be directed to recover Rs. 49,000/- relating to the pension account no.038000100472174 and saving bank account no.0383000100576920. Besides it, petitioner also claimed the damages of Rs. 50,000/-.

(3.) Respondents appeared and filed their written statement stating therein that petitioner has not come to the Court with clean hands and had suppressed the real facts from the Forum and was not entitled to any relief as claimed in his complaint. On merits, it was stated that Complainant Dilbag Singh had tendered two vouchers for an amount of Rs. 49,000/- each for credit to his accounts no. 0383000100576920 in the name of Dilbag Singh and Paramjit Kaur and account no.038000100472174 in the name of the complainant on 16.02.2012. However, inadvertently, both the amounts were posted in one account i.e. 0383000100576920, which was standing in the name of Dilbagh Singh and Paramjit Kaur. This fact was duly recorded in the bank record, including in the cash receipt/payment register as on 16.2.2012, wherein it was categorically mentioned that two amounts of Rs. 49,000/- were posted in the account No. 0383000100576920 at serial no.248 and 250. However, one voucher of Rs. 49,000/- was required to be posted in the account no. 038000100472174. Subsequently, on 26.5.2012, the petitioner raised the issue and after investigating the matter, one of the entries in Savings Account No.038300010057620 was reversed on 28.05.2012 and credited to the account no.038000100472174 of the petitioner, in accordance with the voucher and on his written request. Had there been any other third deposit, he would have raised the issue there and then. However, thereafter petitioner kept silent for a long time but later on he moved a complaint to the Circle Office of the Respondent No.1 with false allegations. All the facts were duly explained by respondent no.1 and the inspector of the Circle Office investigated the matter as per record and reported to Circle Head vide letter dated 14.11.2013. In this regard, the Circle Office, Kapurthala also gave detailed facts to the petitioner vide letter dated 14.11.2013. The crux of the facts was that the petitioner had deposited two vouchers of Rs. 49,000/- to be deposited in his two separate accounts i.e. account no. 0383000100576920 and 038000100472174. However, inadvertently the Clerk of the respondent no.1 posted the said two vouchers in one account i.e., 0383000100576920 and after coming to know the error, the said entry was reversed and accordingly an amount of Rs. 49,000/- each were credited in the said accounts of the petitioner. Respondents denied all the other allegations of the petitioner raised in the complaint.