State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, ... vs Thangakumar, S/O.C.Paulus, No.15/D4, ... on 20 April, 2012
THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI. Present: Honble Thiru Justice R.REGUPATHI, President Thiru.A.K.Annamalai, Judicial Member Thiru.S.Sambandam, Member. F.A.No.687/2011 [Against order in C.C.No.8/2009 on the file of the DCDRF, Thanjavur] FRIDAY, THE 20th DAY OF APRIL 2012. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Yagappa Nagar Branch, Thanjavur. .. Appellant/Opposite party /Vs/ Thangakumar, S/o.C.Paulus, No.15/D4, Rajaji Road, Srinivasapuram, Thanjavur. .. Respondent/Complainant Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Forum, against the opposite party praying for the direction to the opposite party to pay the damages for suffering and difficulties encounted by the opposite party on account of its gross negligence and deficiency in service which assessed by the complainant at Rs.3,50,000/- and to pay costs. The District Forum allowed the complaint, against the said order, this appeal is preferred praying to set aside the order of the District Forum dated 27.7.10 in C.C.No.8/2009. Counsel for Appellant/Opposite party : M/s.T.Sundar Rajan, Advocate. Counsel for Respondent/Complainant : M/s.R.Dhanalakshmi, Advocate. ORDER ( OPEN COURT )
A.K.ANNAMALAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Opposite party is the appellant.
2. Both sides counsels heard. The appellant/opposite party contended that the deficiency caused in issuing the demand draft to the complainant by the appellant/bank due to human error issued the demand draft with defective date and no deliberate act was done. The deficiency of service was admitted for which the complainant is certainly entitled for compensation. Regarding the contention of the complainant that because of defective demand draft issued by the opposite party his chance of getting dealership from I.O.C for Indane Gas supply was lost and because of it he had sustained loss towards payment of rent and advance for the shop fixed for which also to the District Forum awarded compensation of Rs.25,000/- which was actually not proved by the complainant, in view of the document under Exhibit A2 and A3 those shop is to be allotted for rent only in the event of getting of dealership from the I.O.C and also the advance for the same is also refundable and in those circumstances at the most the complainant could be awarded only for the deficiency caused by the opposite party, while issuing the demand draft with defects and thereby we are of the view the award of compensation for Rs.25,000/- towards loss of godown rent and advance and as far as the award of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony also, which are not proportionate to the claim and thereby they could be reduced reasonably and accordingly the appeal to be allowed to that extent by modifying the order of the District Forum.
3. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part by modifying the order of the District Forum by setting aside the order of compensation for Rs.25,000/- towards loss or rental and advance for the shop and godown payable to the complainant and by reducing the compensation towards mental agony for Rs.5,000/- only and award directing to repay Rs.1,000/- towards the value of the demand draft issued by the opposite party to the complainant is hereby confirmed. No order as to costs in this appeal.
S.SAMBANDAM, A.K.ANNAMALAI, R.REGUPATHI MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PRESIDENT INDEX : YES / NO sg/B-I/aka/Nat.
Ins.