Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Contai Co-Operative Bank Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 12 June, 2018
Author: Rajasekhar Mantha
Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha
1
Sl 05
12-06-2018
ct no. 14
s.d. W. P. 7186(W) of 2018
Contai Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
-versus-
Union of India and ors.
Mr. Ashim Kumar Roy
...for the petitioners.
Mr. Kaushik Chanda, Addl. Solicitor General
Mr. Biswajit Konar
...for the Union of India.
Mr. Raja Saha
Mr. Tapas Kumar Mondal
.....for the State.
The writ petitioner is a cooperative bank and aggrieved
by proceedings initiated by a member loanee. Such proceedings
have been instituted before the Consumer Readressal Forum,
Purba Medinipur under the provisions of the Consumer Protection
Act, 1985.
In the said proceedings, the bank entered appearance
and urged as preliminary point that in view of the provisions of the
2006 Act, and the specific provision contained therein being
Section 102 sub-section 4, Section 145 Sub-section 2(d) and
2
Section 154, the Fora under the Consumer Protection Act may not
have jurisdiction. The Learned Counsel of the Bank also relies
upon a Full Bench decision of our High Court reported in AIR
1990 Cal 380 which held that the authorities under the Consumer
Protection Act do not have jurisdiction in view of the 2006 Act and
its aforesaid provisions.
Per contra, Sri Kaushik Chanda, the Learned Additional
Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India relies upon a
judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Virender
Jain Vs. Alaknanda Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. reported
in (2013) 9 SCC 383. He specifically relies upon the paragraphs
13, 14, 15 thereof. The said case arose under the Haryana
Cooperative Societies Act. It is not clear as of now as to whether
the said Haryana Cooperative Societies Act contains provisions of
exclusion of jurisdiction as referred to hereinabove, under the
2006 Act. The Society concerned was a Cooperative Housing
Society. The distinction between a Cooperative Housing Society
and a Cooperative Bank also needs to be examined, as their
objects are different from one another. There is yet another major
difference in the facts. The Haryana Cooperative Societies Act is
of the year 1984, prior to the CP Act of 1985. The West Bengal
Act is of the year 2006.
3
The learned counsel for the State submits that the
Cooperative Banks stand on a different footing from nationalized
and private banks and this also needs to be examined in the
instant case.
Under the circumstances with a view to consider the
above issues in their proper perspective, it would be in the interest
of justice to stay all proceedings in Consumer Case No. 485 of
2017 now pending before the District Consumer Readressal
Forum, Purba Medinipur at Tamluk between 'Debashis Pradhan'
and the 'Branch Manager of Contai Cooperative Bank Limited.'
The writ petitioner shall serve a notice afresh upon the private
respondent along with a copy of this order. The respondents
shall be entitled to file affidavit-in-opposition within a period of three weeks from date. Reply thereto, if any, may be filed within a period of one week thereafter.
Let the writ petition appear in the list in the 2nd week of July, 2018.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.) 4