Banks have a duty to exercise ordinary care and take reasonable precautions for the protection of the articles kept in lockers, as required by relevant banking laws and regulations.

JUDGMENT :

Basanti Devi, Member

1. United- Puri Nimapara Central Co-operative Bank Limited, represented by its Secretary, who is the opposite party in CD. Case No. 229 of 1998, has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 18.06.2004 of the District Forum, Puri directing the said Bank to pay to the complainant rupees one lakh towards the maturity value of 20 Nos. of destroyed I.V.P. and rupees 500/ - towards cost of litigation.

2. The case of the complainant/Respondent in brief is that the complainant availed facility of locker No. 9 from the Appellant Bank on annual rent in the year 1994. The master key of the locker was with the Officer-In-Charge of the locker and the other key was with the complainant. Unless both the keys are used, in no circumstance the locker would be opened. The complainant had kept gold ornaments, bank documents, postal receipts and twenty numbers of Indira Vikas Patras, in short, I.V. Ps bearing Nos, from 28C-539102 to 28C-539121. The maturity value of each of the I.V.P. is rupees 5000/ - and the total maturity value of all the I.V. Ps on 06.01.2000 is rupees one lakh (Rs. 1,00,000/- ). On 29.11.1996 when the complainant and the then Officer-in-Charge of Lucker Sri Haraprasad Acharya wanted to open said locker, it was not opened easily. Using force, the locker was opened with much difficulty. After it was opened, the complainant found the cotton by which the gold ornaments were packed, the Bank instruments, postal deposit receipts viz. Kishan Vikash Patras, 20 Nos. of I.V. Ps as mentioned above and the Fixed deposit, in short, F.D., receipts have been destroyed by white ants. On verification of the room where said locker was kept, complainant found not only said room was an old one but also, the walls and carpet area are always remaining wet and huge quantity of waste papers were stored near the locker chamber. The opposite party Bank was not maintaining the locker room properly for which his aforesaid valuable documents have been damaged by white ants. Though complainant managed to get fresh F.D. receipt dated 06.07.1994 from the opposite party Bank and got duplicate of Kisan Bikas Patras from postal authority incurring expenditure of rupees 250/ yet the damaged I.V. Ps are refused to be replaced by the postal authority vide letter dated 29.01.1997. Thus due to negligence and carelessness of the opposite party Bank in maintaining said locker room, the complainant sustained loss of rupees 1,00,000/ - which is the maturity value of 20 Nos. of I.V. Ps. Therefore, the complainant filed the C.D. case to direct the opposite party Bank to pay him said amount of rupees one lakh and rupees 450/-the cost born by him in obtaining the duplicates of K.V.P and duplicate F.D.form and cost of litigation rupees 5000/-.

3. The opposite party Bank does not dispute hiring of locker No. 9 by the complainant and about opening of the locker on 19.11.1996 of the instance of the complainant, but denies liability for the alleged loss and damage of the aforesaid articles and document, in the written version. The Bank states that the hirer complainant has never produced the list of articles and documents kept in the locker and the Bank had no opportunity to know the contents of the locker. The Bank does not admit that the walls and carpet area of the locker room were always remaining, wet. Bank claims to have taken all possible precaution from time to time to safeguard the lockers and the locker room was being maintained properly. Thus the Bank had claimed for dismissal of the C.D. case.

4. The District Forum, Puri found that the Bank has neglected to discharge its primary function of rendering service to the complainant in exercising ordinary care and taking reasonable precaution for protection of the articles kept in locker No. 9. The District Forum hold that mere taking up the plea in absence of supporting proof that Bank has taken all possible precaution for protection of such articles cannot absolve its liability. Therefore