State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sri Sourendra Nath Dutt vs Regional Manager, Region -Ii, State ... on 6 August, 2019
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. A/387/2018 ( Date of Filing : 20 Apr 2018 ) (Arisen out of Order Dated 29/03/2018 in Case No. Execution Application No. EA/15/2018 of District Kolkata-II(Central)) 1. Sri Sourendra Nath Dutt 171/A, Bidhan Sarani, P.S. - Burtolla, Kolkata - 700 006. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Regional Manager, Region -II, State Bank of India & Ors. Regional office, 1, Middleton Street, 10th Floor, P.S. - Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 071. 2. Br. Manager, SBI Jorasanko Br., 1/1A, Nanda Mullick Lane, P.S. - Girish Park, Kolkata - 700 006. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER For the Appellant: In-person, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Somnath Mukherjee., Advocate Dated : 06 Aug 2019 Final Order / Judgement Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member
This Appeal is directed against the Order dated 29-03-2018, passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata-II (Central) in EA/15/2018.
Having heard both sides in the matter and on going through the documents on record, we find that the Appellant filed one complaint case for getting Statement of Account in respect a term deposit stood in the name of his deceased uncle, Gobinda Lal Dutta.
After hearing both sides, the Ld. District Forum, vide its order dated 08-09-2016 directed the Respondent Bank to furnish Statement of Account in respect of the subject term deposit to the Appellant and imposed monetary cost upon the Respondent Bank for its failure to provide the requisite document to the Appellant on demand.
Subsequently, the Appellant filed the above mentioned Execution Case.
It appears from the order impugned that by filing a petition, the Respondent Bank expressed its inability to furnish statement of account in respect of the concerned deposit which got matured 30 years ago and considering the improbability of doing so, the Ld. District Forum dropped the Execution Case.
In this regard, we are to state that once the order passed by any Forum remains unchallenged before the Higher Forum and the same gets quashed by it, the order passed by the Ld. District Forum attains finality and it becomes incumbent on the part of the Judgment Debtor to carry out the said order in letter and spirit.
Significantly, the Respondent Bank did not move any Appeal against the order passed by the Ld. District Forum in the complaint case before this Commission and therefore, the Respondent cannot escape its responsibility to carry out the said order in its proper perspective. As the Executing Court cannot go beyond the decree, needless to say, by dismissing the Execution Case, the Ld. District Forum committed legal infirmity.
In view of this we allow this Appeal in part; thereby, set aside the impugned order. Parties to appear before the Ld. District Forum on 06-09-2019.
Meanwhile, if the Respondent Bank feels that it is indeed impossible for the Bank to carry out this aspect of the order at this stage, it may move an Appeal before this Commission within 30 days henceforth and in that case, on consideration of the submission of both sides, necessary order will be passed from this end. [HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA] PRESIDING MEMBER [HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA] MEMBER