Back
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BOMBAY
Mr. Justice G.G. Loney, President; Mr.
M.G. Gavai & Mrs. Ellen Dharkar, Members
PRAKASH R. SHENIA—Complainant
versus
SYNDICATE BANK—Opposite Party
Misc. Appln. No. 31 of 1993—Decided on 10.12.1993
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complainant :Mr. T.N. Tripathi, Advocate.
For the Opp. Party :Ms. D’lima, Advocate.
Non-compliance with the order of the Commission can lead to the imposition of the maximum penalty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Headnote:
Consumer Protection Act - Syndicate Bank - The court held Syndicate Bank guilty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000 for non-compliance with the order of the Commission.
Fact of the Case:
The Syndicate Bank failed to comply with the order of the Commission on multiple occasions, leading to a six-month delay. The bank requested further time for payment, but the court did not agree and imposed the maximum penalty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found Syndicate Bank guilty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act and sentenced it to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 within a week, failing which further action would be taken against the bank.
Issues: Non-compliance with the order of the Commission, request for further time for payment, imposition of penalty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Syndicate Bank showed utter disregard for complying with the order of the Commission on multiple occasions, leading to a six-month delay, and therefore imposed the maximum penalty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Final Decision: Syndicate Bank is held guilty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000 within a week, failing which further action would be taken against the bank.
Mr. Justice G.G. Loney, President—Heard Shri T.N. Tripathi, Advocate for the complainant and Ms. D’lima, Advocate for the opposite party. The order passed by this Commission dated 19.5.93 in Complaint No. 171 /93 has not been complied with by opposite party i.e. Syndicate Bank so far. By an order dated 6.12.1993 we have held Syndicate Bank guilty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act and the time was granted to the opposite party for hearing on the point of sentence on 8.12.1993 on 8.12.1993 it was represented by the opposite party that they are facing action from their client to deposit the amount in Court by 10.12.1993. In view of the said statement, the miscellaneous application was posted today for final order. Even today the Syndicate Bank has failed to comply with the order passed by this Commission. It is stated by the learned Advocate for the opposite party that the General Manager of Syndicate Bank is out of station and therefore no decision can be taken as regards the payment to be given to the complainant. This is totally in disregard to the undertaking given, .by the Advocate for the opposite party on 8.12.1993. We therefore heard the parties on the point of sentence.
2. According to Shri Tripathi, the Syndicate Bank has shown utter disregard while complying the order of this Commission, not on one occasion but on six occasions and therefore, the maximum penalty as provided under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act be imposed on the Syndicate Bank. There is six months delay in complying the order of this Commission. The Advocate for the opposite party has submitted that they will be granted further time to make payment which we do not agree. In view, the statement made by Shri Tripathi, Advocate for the complainant is correct and under the factual circumstances of this case, it would be appropriate to impose the maximum penalty as provided under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Hence we pass the following order:
3. The opposite party i.e. Syndicate Bank, Ghatkopar Branch is held guilty under Sec. 27 of the Consumer Protection Act and sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-within a week time from today, failing which further action would be taken against Syndicate Bank.
Ordered accordingly.
–
