Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 1]

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

The West Bengal State Co-Operative Bank ... vs Alipurduar Mahila Samabay Rindan ... on 23 July, 2012

  
 
 
 
 
 
 State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission




 

 



 

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

 

West Bengal 

 

BHABANI BHAVAN
(GROUND FLOOR)

 

31, BELVEDERE ROAD,
ALIPORE

 

KOLKATA  700 027

 

  

 

S.C. CASE NO. : FA/54/2012 

 

(Arisen out of Judgement/Order dt. 04.01.12 in Case No. CF 29/2010 of
DCDRF, Circuit Bench, Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri) 

 

  

 

DATE OF FILING : 13.02.2012 DATE OF FINAL ORDER: 23.07.2012 

 

  

 APPELLANTS 

 

  

 

1. The
West Bengal State Co-operative Bank Ltd. 

 

 having
office at 24 A, Waterloo Street 

 

 Kolkata-700
069 represented through its  

 

 Managing
Director. 

 

2. The
Branch Manager, West Bengal State Co-operative 

 

 Bank
Ltd., Alipurduar Branch, situated at Chowpathy  

 

 Alipurduar,
Pin-736 121. 

 

  

 

 RESPONDENT  

 

  

 

Alipurduar
Mahila Samabay Rindan Samity Ltd. 

 

Represented
by its Secretary Smt. Dipali Roy Chowdhury 

 

Having
its registered office at Edward Library under 

 

P.O.
and P.S. Alipurduar, Pin-736 121. 

 

  

 

BEFORE : MEMBER  : MR. D.BHATTACHARYA  

 

  MEMBER  :
MR. J.BAG  

 

  

 

FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr. S.N.Dey,
Mr. A.Mukhopadhyay, Ld. Advocates  

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT / O.P.S.:
Ms. S.Sehanabis, Ld. Advocate  

 



 

  



 

  

 

: O R D E R :
 

MR. J.BAG, LD.

MEMBER The present Appeal is directed against the Order dt. 04.01.12 passed in Case No. CF 29/2010 by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Circuit Bench, Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri.

The facts, in brief, in the present Appeal are as follows :-

The complainant is a registered society and is represented by its Secretary having a current account in the bank of the Ops at Alipurduar branch bearing No. 1400. In the year 2008 there was a financial scam in the Ops bank where it was detected that there was discrepancy in the passbook of the complainant against deposits and many deposits were not credited in the said account of the complainant by the bank. Even after several correspondences the Ops did not respond and a sum of Rs. 2,10,250/- is not shown in the complainants Account save for the fact that a sum of Rs. 50,360/- has been entered in the Cash Book of the OP against a total deposit of Rs. 94,060/-.
The OPs/Bank authorities in their written version admitted that there is a missing credit of a sum of Rs. 2,10,250/- for the period from 15.10.07 to 09.09.08. They mentioned inter alia that one of their employees, Shri Arup Kumar Dey, Receiving Cashier, allegedly misappropriated some deposits made by the account holders and a criminal case was pending against him.

It was argued that the matter was subjudice in a competent court of law and should be disposed of accordingly, holding, again that the Ld. District Forum has no jurisdiction in such matter.

The Ld. District Forum proceeded with the complaint, went thorough its details, and considered the written arguments and documents placed before them and finally awarded the judgement in favour of the complainant with the entitlement of Rs. 3,53,700/- and also interest @ 8% per annum over the respective deposits with effect from the date of deposits with Rs. 10,000/- as comepensation for the mental agony and harassment of the complainant and further Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost.

Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement of the Ld. District Forum below the Appellants/Ops came up with this Appeal with strong objection as to the jurisdiction of the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in entertaining the subject complaint.

The Appellants have alleged that the Ld. District Forum has exercised its jurisdiction illegally and with material irregularity in entertaining the complaint case in not considering the fact that under clause

(d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 102 of The West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 a dispute between two cooperative societies with regard to their business, comes within the purview of the dispute to be referred to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and hence, the jurisdiction of the Ld. District Forum is barred under Sub-Section (4) of Section 102 of the said Act. They have argued that the complainant has wrongly described itself as a society registered under The Societies Act, though it is evident from its name and style that it is a cooperative credit society registered under The West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 is deemed to have been registered under The West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006 and because of such position, the jurisdiction of Any Civil Court or any Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum to try any dispute arising between two cooperative societies is barred by Sub-section 1/d and Sub-section 4 of Section 102 read with Section 145 of The West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006. The OP/Bank, i.e. The West Bengal State Cooperative Bank Ltd. is a cooperative society as defined under Section 4/62 of The West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act read with Section 3(u) of The National Bank For Agriculture and Rural Development Act, 1981, which lays down as follows :

State Cooperative Bank means the principal cooperative society in a State, the primary object of which is the financing of other cooperative societies in the State.
The complainant society i.e. Alipurduar Mahila Samabay Rindan Samity is, no doubt, a cooperative society as evident from its very name and as rightly pointed by the Appellants. The Ld. District Forum below appears to have not considered the point and they preferred to ponder more over the consumer status of the complainant than the legal bar laid down by a special Act having overriding effect in relation to a general Act which is but well settled. We are of the view in the above context that the Order/Judgement of the Ld. District Forum below in the present case is devoid of legal footings and accordingly order that The Appeal succeeds on contest. The impugned Order/Judgement be and the same is set aside. There shall be no costs.
 
MEMBER    MEMBER