Decided on August 14,2013

S B J Systems Respondents


- (1.) CASE called several times since morning but none put in appearance on behalf of the parties. The respondent has been proceed ex parte vide separate order of even date. No request has been received on behalf of the appellant for adjournment of the case. As per the provision of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complaints as well as the appeals are to be decided within the prescribed period. Thus, the non -cooperative attitude of the appellant is against the spirit of the Consumer Protection Act. Under these circumstances we do not think it appropriate to adjourn this appeal indefinitely and therefore we proceed to decide the same after going through the case file.
(2.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 10.1.2013 passed by District Consumer Forum, Faridabad whereby complaint bearing No. 290/2011 filed by complainant (respondent herein) against the appellant -opposite party alleging deficiency in service for not maintaining the current account of complainant properly, was accepted in the following terms: "8. The respondent bank is, therefore, directed to pay a sum of Rs. 3,500 to the complainant which has been charged from him on account of dishonouring charges of the cheques and service tax, etc. and the bank is further directed to pay Rs. 50,000 to the complainant on account of business loss caused to him by stoppage the operation of the bank account. The respondent bank is further directed to pay Rs. 10,000 to the complainant for mental harassment and litigation expenses."
(3.) THE brief facts of the present case are that the complainant concern through its sole proprietor Sunil Kohli was having a current account with the appellant -opposite party (hereinafter referred as Bank) on which the complainant had been availing cash credit facility since 10.4.2011. According to the complainant he was paying instalments of other loans and insurance policies through ECSs and post -dated cheques but the Bank was not supplying the account statement to him regularly. On 3.5.2011 the complainant wrote a letter in this regard and came to know that the Bank had already stopped the operation of his account due to some technical problems. Complainant further alleged that a cheque bearing No. 009930 for Rs. 1,25,000, which was never issued by the complainant, had been encashed and the cheques issued by the complainant in respect of ECS instalments were being dishonoured. Alleging it a case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum seeking direction to the opposite party to start the operation of his bank account; to pay Rs. 3,500 on account of dishonour charges of cheques and ECSs; Rs. 3.00 lacs on account of business loss; Rs. 1,50,000 on account of spoiling the reputation and track with the other financial institutions and vendors of the complainant and also to pay Rs. 45,000 for harassment, mental agony and pain faced by the complainant. Upon notice, the opposite party appeared and contested the complaint by filing written statement wherein preliminary objection was raised regarding maintainability of the complaint the complainant being not consumer as the current account was for commercial purpose and not for earning livelihood. On merits, it was stated that the complainant had developed friendly terms with the officials of the Bank much before sanction of the credit facility but when he started committingbreach,he started misbehaving with the staff and the notice dated 7.3.2011 was issued to him for committing default in paying the loan. It was denied that the complainant had not issued cheque No. 009930 for Rs. 1,25,000. Denying the other allegations of the complainant, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.