State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Jalpaiguri Peoples' Co-Operative ... vs Jay Chand Lohia on 27 May, 2016
Cause Title/Judgement-Entry STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL 11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087 First Appeal No. FA/603/2014 (Arisen out of Order Dated 01/11/2013 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/59/2013 of District Jalpaiguri) 1. The Jalpaiguri Peoples' Co-operative Bank Ltd. Regd. no.139, dated 13/09/2013, Head Office-Temple Street, P.S. Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri. 2. Bank-in-Charge, Jalpaiguri Head office, Peoples, Co-operative Bank Ltd. Temple Street, P.S. Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri. 3. Bank-in-Charge, Jalpaiguri Head office, Peoples, Co-operative Bank Ltd. Temple Street, P.S. Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri. 4. Branch-in-Charge, The Jalpaiguri Head office, Peoples Co-operative Bank Ltd. Binnaguri Branch, Temple Street, P.S. Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Jay Chand Lohia S/o Late Suraj Lohia, Telepara Hat Khola, P.O. - Binnaguri, P.S. -Banarhat, Dist. Jalpaiguri. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KALIDAS MUKHERJEE PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY MEMBER For the Appellant: Mr. Sibaji Sankar Dhar Mrs. Priyanka Das , Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Kapil Guha, Advocate ORDER 27.05.2016 MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY, HON'BLE MEMBER
This Appeal u/s 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed by the OPs challenging the judgment and order dated 1.11.2013 passed ex parte by the Ld. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalpaiguri in C.C.No. 59/2013, directing the OPs-Cooperative Bank to pay to the Complainant Rs. 3,31,797/- being the principal amount together with interest @ 4% per annum upto 30.6.2013, i.e. Rs. 53,000/-, as also the cost of Rs. 1,000/- within one month from the date of the order, failing which "the complainant is to recover the said amount along with interest @ 4% p.a. to be calculated on and from the date of filing of the case till realization of the entire decretal dues from the OPs by filing separate proceeding against the OPs".
Facts of the case, as emanating from the materials on records, are, in short, that the Respondent/Complainant used to have a Savings Bank Account (No. 6, Ledger Folio No. 200/1) with the OP No. 1-Cooperative Bank wherein the credit balance as on 23.7.2009 was Rs. 3,31,797/-. For urgent need of money when the Respondent/Complainant attempted to withdraw the money from the said S.B.Account, the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank did not allow the Respondent/Complainant to withdraw the money from the said S.B.Account despite meeting the branch-in-charge of the Appellant No. 1/OP No. 1-Cooperative Bank. Having faced repeated denial by the Appellant No. 1/OP No. 1-Cooperative Bank to withdraw the money, the Respondent/Complainant moved the Complaint concerned before the Ld. District Forum which passed the impugned judgment and order in the manner aforesaid. Aggrieved by such order the OPs have preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Advocate for the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank submits that the Ld. District Forum passed the judgment and order without allowing the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank the effective opportunity of contesting the case and thus denying the natural justice, the basic tenet of justice delivery system, to the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank.
The Ld. Advocate further submits that the Ld. District Forum erred in law in passing the judgment and order ignoring the provisions of Clause (d) of sub section 1 of Section 102 read with sub section 4 of Section 102 of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 2006, the conjoint provisions of which clearly bar the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora in the matter of dispute between the Cooperative Society and any person having transaction with it.
The Ld. Advocate finally submits that in view of the submissions so put forward the instant Appeal should be allowed and the impugned judgment and order be set aside and the Complaint be dismissed.
On the other hand, the Ld. Advocate for the Respondent/Complainant submits that submission by the Ld. Advocate for the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank about the denial of opportunity of contesting the case is not true as the procees of service of Notice by the Ld. District Forum was duly completed as it appears from the observation in the impugned judgment and order to the effect "Inspite of having process of this Forum when this O.P. did not contest ....."
The Ld. Advocate further submits that there is no jurisdictional bar under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in respect of adjudication of the case by the Consumer Fora as the Consumer Protection Act, being an additional beneficial legislation, and the West Bengal Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 do not stipulate any bar of jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora in this kind of matter.
The Ld. Advocate finally submits that in view of the aforesaid submission the instant Appeal should be dismissed and the judgment and order impugned be affirmed.
We have heard both the sides, considered their rival submissions and perused the materials on records.
There is no evidence on records to show that the Notices regarding the Complaint Case were duly served upon the Appellants/OPs- Cooperative Bank. Even in the judgment and order impugned there is no mention of any specific evidence from which the Ld. District Forum was satisfied about due service of Notices upon the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank. All these indicate the preponderance of probability of the Appellants'/OPs' getting no effective opportunity of contesting the case concerned. Passing of an order without allowing effective opportunity to the parties concerned to advance their respective defence is against the principle of dispensation of justice.
It must also be remembered, as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab & Anr. Vs. Shyamlal Murari & Anr., reported in 1976 (SCR) (2) 82, that procedural law is not an obstruction but an aid to justice and also it is not a resistant but lubricant in the administration of justice. After all, Courts are to do justice, not to wreck this end product on mere technicalities.
In view of the above discussion we deem it just and proper to allow the instant Appeal in part and set aside the impugned judgment and order and remand the case to the Ld. District Forum for adjudication afresh on merits and as per law after allowing the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank the effective opportunity to contest the case.
Accordingly, the instant Appeal is allowed in part, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and the case is remanded to the Ld. District Forum for adjudication afresh on merits as per law upon allowing the Appellants/OPs-Cooperative Bank the effective opportunity of hearing and advance their defence. No order as to costs. [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KALIDAS MUKHERJEE] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MR. TARAPADA GANGOPADHYAY] MEMBER