CANARA BANK Vs. BHAGWATI ELECTRONICS & ANR
LAWS(HRCDRC)-2013-11-1
HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on November 12,2013

CANARA BANK Appellant
VERSUS
Bhagwati Electronics And Anr Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) MR . B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member -This revision petition hasbeenpreferredby opposite party No. 1 against the order dated 21.8.2013 whereby District Consumer Forum, Bhiwani stayed the recovery of loan amount from the respondent No. 1 -complainant till the decision of the complaint.
(2.) COMPLAINANT (respondent No. 1 herein) had availed Cash Credit Facility from the petitioner -Bank to the extent of Rs. 15.00 lacs on the security of the hypothecation and coverage of risk of stock. The Bank had been getting the stocks insured and debiting the premium amount in the account of the complainant. On the intervening night of 4th/5th March, 2011, a theft took place in the insured shop of the complainant. According to the complainant, goods worth Rs. 12.00 lacs were stolen by some unknown persons. Complainant approached the opposite parties to indemnify the loss suffered by it but to no response. Complainant came to know that the Insurance Policy of the stocks of the shop had expired in March, 2010 and thereafter the opposite parties had not taken the new policy. Thus, alleging it a case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, complainant invoked the jurisdiction of the District Consumer Forum seeking direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs. 12.00 lacs indemnifying the loss caused to the complainant on account of theft in the shop along with interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of the i.e. 5th March, 2011 till the date of payment; to pay Rs. 50,000 compensation for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 5,500 as litigation expenses.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the complaint an application was moved by the complainant for staying the recovery proceedings by the opposite parties by resorting to SARFAESI Act, 2002 as per their notice dated 1.8.2013 for Rs. 16,04,559.66 which included Rs. 12.00 lacs and interest thereupon. " Application was opposed by the petitioner -opposite parties taking plea that as per provisions of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, District Consumer Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint and the complainant could have filed an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 34 of the ibid Act. It was prayed that application moved by the complainant merited dismissal.;


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