INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, REPRESENTED BY ITS SR. MANAGER Vs. SHEBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION petition no. 3521 of 2008 has been filed under section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 challenging the order dated 10.06.2008 passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore ( ˜the State Commission) in appeal no. 2178 of 2007.

(2.) THE facts of the case as per respondent no. 1/ complainant are as follows:

(3.) THE respondent no. 1/ complainant is the proprietrix of the firm M/s Shawn Distributors and for her livelihood was engaged in the business of distribution of ice -creams as stockists and distributors for M/s Pastonji who are manufacturers of ice -creams. The business involved stocking and storing of ice -creams in cold storage, in cold rooms. For this purpose, the respondent no. 1/ complainant borrowed a sum of Rs.3,95,000/ - as term loan from the 1st opposite party - the Bank in October 2004 and put up a cold storage unit. The respondent no. 1 also availed a sum of Rs.1,00,000/ - against stock of ice -creams in cold storage. During the course of transactions with the Bank, the respondent no. 1 noticed a debit of Rs.12,300/ - in her account no. 310400023 on 25.01.2004. When the respondent no. 1 made enquiries with the Bank she was informed that in order to cover the risk of lending, the Bank had insured against any loss to the extent of the loan amounts and debited the account of the respondent no. 1 for a sum of Rs.10,882/ - and a sum of Rs.1418/ - as premiums paid to the 2nd opposite party - insurance company. Since the actual act of insuring against any loss was handled by her Bank, the respondent no. 1 went about her business of attending to the day to day administration, being fully confident that she had reposed her trust and faith in the competent hands of the 1st opposite party - the Bank. As demanded by the 1st Opposite Party - Bank, the respondent no.1 even credited the said sum of Rs.12,300/ - to the said account on 05.11.2004. The 2nd opposite party - insurance company or its representative, did not ever meet this respondent no. 1 either before or after the payment of the premium by the 1st opposite party - Bank. Even after considerable time had elapsed after the debit of the premium amount, the respondent no. 1 did not receive any receipt or policy from either of the opposite parties. So the respondent no.1 made enquiries with the 2nd opposite party - insurance company regarding this. The 2nd opposite party - insurance company then informed her that as there was a loan from the 1st opposite party - Bank and there was a lien on the policies held by the 1st opposite party - Bank, the policies had been sent to the 1st opposite party - Bank. The 1st opposite party - Bank confirmed the same and also assured her that all her interests and the 1st opposite party - Banks own interests were fully protected. In view of the abundant trust and confidence that the respondent no. 1 had on the 1st opposite party - Bank, she blissfully went about her business fully convinced.