SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S.M.KANTIKAR, DINESH SINGH
State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Kumar Maity – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Arpit Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2: NEMO

ORDER

Dinesh Singh, Member—This case relates to deficiency in service alleged against the State Bank of India (SBI) for alleged fraudulent withdrawal of an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- averred by the complainant to have been deposited by him with the Bank.

2. The District Forum vide its Order dated 14.05.2014 had allowed the complaint. The State Commission vide its Order dated 25.10.2017 had concurred with the District Forum in its findings of deficiency in service on the part of the SBI while partially modifying the award made by the District Forum. This revision petition has been filed by the SBI against the said Order dated 25.10.2017 of the State Commission.

3. On 24.08.2018, after hearing arguments in part and after perusing the record, this Commission had passed the following interim Order:—

Dated: 24.08.2018

ORDER

Partly heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Perused the record.

We are of the view that in this case a detailed report on the whole matter shall be furnished by the chief executive of the petitioner bank or a senior responsible officer indicated by him within a period of two months through counsel.

In case the chief executive indicates that a senior res

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top