SYNCO INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR

LAWS(SC)-2002-1-1

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Decided on January 15,2002

SYNCO INDUSTRIES Appellant

VERSUS

STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR Respondents

Cited Judgements :-

AMIRA FOODS (INDIA) LTD ; PRODIMPORTING RICE UKRAINE VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2015-1-116] [REFERRED TO]
INDOSIN LTD VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2015-5-24] [REFERRED TO]
KRRISH FLORENCE ESTATE BUYERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION VS. ANGLE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2015-8-238] [REFERRED]
N M JAYARAM VS. ASHED PROPERTIES AND INVESTMENT PVT LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2007-12-43] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD HANIF VS. MANDIR OF SHRI BADEBALAJI [LAWS(MPH)-2005-8-119] [REFERRED TO]
TIRUPATI BALAJI COLD STORAGE AND ICE FACTORY VS. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO [LAWS(NCD)-2002-12-112] [REFERRED TO]
BRIGHT TRANSPORT CO. VS. SANGLI SAHAKARI BANK LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2012-1-69] [REFERRED TO]
H.M. CONSTRUCTIONS VS. KISHAN VITHAL RAO KULKARNI [LAWS(NCD)-2012-9-67] [REFERRED TO]
RAJSHREE AGGARWAL W/O NEERAJ KUMAR AGGARWAL VS. IDYLLIC RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2014-12-69] [REFERRED TO]
DECORA COTTON EXPORTS PVT. LTD VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2023-2-36] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHWINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. SARWAN SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2017-1-328] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. VISHWABARATHI HOUSE BUILDING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY [LAWS(SC)-2003-1-80] [REFERRED TO]
R.KUMAR VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-428] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWANJI D PATEL VS. CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR [LAWS(NCD)-2011-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
VARGHESE SILVESTER SHANTISADAN VS. ARCHANA DHAWAN NURTURE CLINIC [LAWS(NCD)-2014-8-65] [REFERRED TO]
GAURAV GARG VS. PEPSICO INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(NCD)-2015-9-78] [REFERRED TO]
LAKBHIR SINGH GILL VS. CHAIRMAN, STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(NCD)-2019-5-116] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL ALUMINIUM COMPANY LIMITED VS. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2022-1-59] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR ALLAHABAD AND UTTARANCHAL HIGH COURT [LAWS(ALL)-2009-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
UTTAMKUMAR SAMANTA VS. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2014-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
SUDESH KUMAR GOYAL VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-2023-9-56] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL ENGINEERING LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER K DIWAKARAN NAIR VS. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-2012-2-50] [REFERRED TO]
P.V.MURUGANANDAM VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-2-271] [REFERRED TO]
V.KARUPPASAMY VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-315] [REFERRED TO]
P.VENKATACHALAM VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-316] [REFERRED TO]
ANVIL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT PVT LTD VS. GLOBAL TRUST BANK LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2002-5-29] [RELIED ON]
NILMONI MUKHERJEE VS. ASIM KUMAR CHATTOPADHYAY [LAWS(CAL)-2008-3-81] [REFERRED TO]
VISHAMBER SUNDERDAS BADLANI & ANR VS. INDIAN BANK & 3 ORS [LAWS(NCD)-2007-9-74] [REFERRED TO]
ADARSH CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS LTD. VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. [LAWS(NCD)-2013-9-84] [REFERRED TO]
SANGITA TUKARAMJI ROKDE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(NCD)-2014-5-116] [REFERRED TO]
HAREKRISHNA BISWAS VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(NCD)-2014-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
HARSORIA HEALTHCARE PVT LTD VS. ROYAL JORDANIAN AIRLINES [LAWS(NCD)-2015-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
RASHEED AHMAD USMANI VS. DLF LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2019-7-7] [REFERRED TO]
MUKUL AGGARWAL AND ORS. VS. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(DELCDRC)-2014-12-3] [REFERRED TO]
G.SEERALAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-8-243] [REFERRED TO]
POCHAMPALLY HANDLOOM HOUSE VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2002-10-81] [RELIED ON]
TRAI FOODS LTD. VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. [LAWS(SC)-2003-1-132] [REFERRED TO]
PARENTERAL DRUGS (INDIA) LIMITED VS. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2023-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. CITIMAKE BUILDERS PVT. LTD VS. SAMATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2012-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH KUMAR VS. AKHIL SAXENA [LAWS(NCD)-2014-8-57] [REFERRED TO]
ARUNAVA MUKHERJEE VS. BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED [LAWS(NCD)-2014-9-129] [REFERRED TO]
CHANCHALI NARENDRA VS. CONTINENTAL HOSPITALS [LAWS(NCD)-2020-6-30] [REFERRED TO]
EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD. VS. CARPENTER CLASSIC INDIA PVT. LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(NCD)-2015-5-200] [REFERRED TO]
GANGADHAR SHAMANDAS MANGLANI VS. HOTEL LUCKY INDIA [LAWS(NCD)-2022-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
RASHMI HANDA VS. OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY (INDIA) LTD. [LAWS(NCD)-2014-1-66] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVOM PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR PVT. LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(NCD)-2014-11-88] [REFERRED TO]
UNISCANS AND SONICS LTD VS. BRITISH AIRWAYS [LAWS(NCD)-2002-12-103] [REFERRED TO]
S DHARMARAJ VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND WATER SUPPLY DEPARTMENT [LAWS(MAD)-2018-4-818] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJ LLOYD LIMITED VS. CORPORATE RISKS INDIA PVT LTD [LAWS(SC)-2008-12-93] [REFERRED TO]
SUO MOTO VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2005-6-24] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. SAFE HOME DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS VS. SAMATA SAHAKARI BANK LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2012-10-33] [REFERRED TO]
RAJNI GUPTA VS. D L F UNIVERSAL LTD [LAWS(NCD)-2015-3-29] [REFERRED TO]
VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LIMITED VS. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. [LAWS(NCD)-2015-9-76] [REFERRED TO]
NEPA LTD VS. MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(NCD)-2002-11-14] [REFERRED TO]
V R N MURTHY PROP S FARMS AND HOLDINGS INC VS. INDO [LAWS(NCD)-2002-12-124] [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH CHAND JAINCOMPLAINA VS. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(NCD)-2002-8-14] [RELIED ON]
ORISSA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. BIJAY KUMAR PRADHAN [LAWS(ORI)-2016-10-71] [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The present appellants moved the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission alleging that the respondents had been guilty of deficiency in service in that they had, without good reason, frozen the sanctioned working facilities of the appellant without prior intimation. In this behalf, the appellant sought a direction to the first respondent to prepare a funding package to restart the appellant's oil division and to grant waiver of interest, damages in the sum of Rupees fifteen crores and an additional sum of Rupees sixty lakhs to cover cost of travelling, man days lost and other expenses incurred by the appellant in pursuing the matter with the respondents. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed the complaint saying, "The complaint is against the bank, whether the bank is entitled to reduce the loan facilities or not. We do not consider it to be a fit case to be tried under the Consumer Protection Act. The Original Petition is dismissed. However, the complainant is at liberty to go (to) the Civil court or any other forum, if so advised".
(2.)Against this order of dismissal of the complaint, the appellant has filed this appeal and it has been referred to a Bench of three Judges because it was felt that the question raised was one of importance.
(3.)Given the nature of the claim in the complaint and the prayer for damages in the sum of Rupees fifteen crores and for an additional sum of Rupees sixty lakhs for covering the cost of travelling and other expenses incurred by the appellant, it is obvious that very detailed evidence would have to be led, both to prove the claim and thereafter to prove the damages and expenses. It is, therefore, in any event, not an appropriate case to be heard and disposed of in a summary fashion. The National Commission was right in giving to the appellant liberty to move the Civil Court. This is an appropriate claim for a Civil Court to decide and, obviously, was not filed before a Civil Court to start with because, before the Consumer Forum, any figure in damages can be claimed without having to pay court-fees. This, in that sense, is an abuse of the process of the Consumer Forum.

Click here to view full judgement.