A bank is not liable to pay compensation to its customers for the loss or injury suffered by them on account of its failure to carry on banking operations during the period of an illegal strike by a section of the staff of the Bank involving physical obstruction and prevention of the entry into the premises of the Branch Office of the Bank by the officers and willing members of the staff, if the failure to render service was occasioned by reasons wholly beyond the control of the Bank and was not attributable to any negligence on the part of the Bank.

V. Balakrishna Eradi, President—The appellant before us the Federal Bank Ltd. is a Scheduled Bank which has its registered office at Alwaye in Kerala. It has more than 350 Branches spread all over the country including two in the State of Bihar, one at Jamshedpur and the other at Patna. In or about November, 1988 the Award employees of the Bank had put forward certain demands and in an attempt to arrive at a mutually acceptable settlement of the issues several meetings were held between the management representatives of the employees Union, some of which were held in the presence of the Assistant Labour Officer (C), Ernakulam. While conciliation proceedings were pending before the Assistant Labour Officer, the award employees of the Bank in all the Branches of the country went on an indefinite strike from January 21,1988 and as a result thereof the functioning of the Bank in all its Branches throughout India was completely paralysed. A settlement was ultimately reached between the management and the employees Union at Ernakulam on March 11,1988 and with effect from that very day the normal work was resumed in all the Branches.

2. The respondent Shri Bijeon Mishra in his capacity as Managing Trustee of the Consumer Guidance Society of Jamshedpur had a Savings Bank account in the Bistupur Branch of the Bank at Jamshedpur. There was a balance of Rs. 1.55 lakhs in the said account as on January 21,1988. On March 22,1988, the respondent wrote a letter to the Chairman of the appellant-Bank demanding full compensation to the consumers for the closure of the Branch at Jamshedpur from 21-1-1988 to 11-3-1988 and in that letter he threatened the Chairman of the Bank that if no positive response was received from the Chairman the Society would be compelled to appeal to all the account holders of the Bank to close their accounts immediately and also to launch a “Satyagrah” from April 1, 1988 “for the fulfilment of their justified demands.” He further stated that the Society would also be referring the matter to the State Commission constituted at Patna under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. There was no indication in this letter of the quantum of compensation that was being claimed. Subsequently, on April 7, 1988, the respondent filed a complaint before the State Commission, Patna stating that because of the closure of the Bank for the period of 51 days, the Society could not bring to use and rightfully invest the money lying to its credit in the savings bank account with the Bank during the said period and its good-Will in the market had been damaged as it could not complete on time its project of establishing a Food Testing Laboratory. On these grounds it was prayed that the State Commission should award compensation to the Society to the tune of Rs. 1.55 lakhs “for the damages of good-Will, financial loss and also welfare of consumers.”

3. The appellant-Bank filed a detailed reply before the State Commission denying liability for payment of any compensation to the complainant. It was submitted therein that the strike launched by the employees was during the pendency of conciliation proceedings was illegal inasmuch as Banking had been declared as a “public utility service” under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and any strike in a public utility service during the pendency of conciliation proceedings is illegal under Section 22 of the said Act. It was further submitted on behalf of the Bank before the State Commission that since the striking employees were sitting in front of the entrance of the Bank on all the working days and physically preventing officers and willing workers from entry into the Bank premises, it became totally impossible for the Bank to open the Branch and render service to the customers. Though requests were made by the Manager of the Jamshedpur Branch of the Bank to the concerned officers of the Police Department for grant of police protection, those requests did not evoke any favourable respons