Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
ROBIN PHUKAN
Indrani Baishya, D/o Late Prakash Ch. Medhi – Appellant
Versus
Chairman, State Bank Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. U.J. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. A.K. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1—5.
2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order, dated 26.04.2024 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (herein after National Commission), New Delhi, in First Appeal No.1986/2019 and also prayed for affirming the order dated 05.09.2019, passed by the Assam State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (herein after State Commission).
3. The background facts leading to filing of this petition are briefly stated as under:
“Sometimes in the year 2011, a complaint was filed by the petitioners herein, before the State Commission, Guwahati, for being suffered monetary loss, amounting Rs.23,85,600/- and also for mental agony, due to theft of their valuables from the locker of the State Bank of India and others, the respondents herein. The State Commissioner after hearing both the parties, passed the final judgment and order dated 05.09.2019 directing the respondents herein to pay a sum of Rs.23,85,600/- being the value of the ornaments and jewel
Quasi-judicial bodies must provide reasons for decisions affecting rights; failure to do so constitutes legal infirmity, particularly when reducing awarded compensation.
The court emphasized the principle that the High Court should not substitute its own conclusion to the one arrived at by authorities below unless the decision shocks the conscience of the Court.
A bank's allowance of withdrawals from a joint account involving an illiterate individual violates regulatory norms, necessitating accountability for negligence and fraud.
(1) It is a pre-condition to deposit 50 per cent of amount as ordered by State Commission before appeal is entertained by National Commission – However, that does not take away jurisdiction of Nation....
Amount of compensation cannot be unduly reduced by National Commission even after deficiency in rendering service is proved.
(1) Banks cannot wash off their hands and claim that they bear no liability towards their customers for operation of locker.(2) Banks as custodians of public property cannot leave customers in lurch ....
Point of Law : President or the senior most member is entitled to conduct proceedings of the National Commission in accordance with the statutory prescription.
The State Consumer Commission exceeded its jurisdiction by ordering re-conveyance, conflicting with ongoing civil litigation and statutory limitations on review powers.
National Commission – Revisional Jurisdiction of National Commission under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is extremely limited.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
