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

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 6722

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
The Punjab Heritage and Tourism Promotion Board – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
SC/4/CC/37/2022



STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. SC/4/CC/37/2022 The Punjab Heritage and Tourism Promotion Board PRESENT ADDRESS - plot no. 3, sector 38-A, Chandigarh through Shri Anshuman Garg, Assistant Controller of Finance and Accounts. ,CHANDIGARH.

.......Complainant(s)

Versus State Bank of India PRESENT ADDRESS - 8th Floor, State Bank of Bhavan Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 Maharashtra india through its Chairman cum Managing Director ,CHANDIGARH.

.......Opposite Party(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. PADMA PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. PREETINDER SINGH , MEMBER FOR THE COMPLAINANT:

The Punjab Heritage and Tourism Promotion Board DATED: 03/07/2025

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH [ADDITIONAL BENCH]

Complaint No. : 37 of 2022
Date of Institution : 13.04.2022
Date of Decision : 03.07.2025
The Punjab Heritage & Tourism Promotion Board, Plot No.3, Sector 38-A, Chandigarh through Shri Anshuman Garg, Assistant Controller of Finance and Accounts.

….Complainant V E R S U S

1. State Bank of India, 8 th Floor, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021, Maharashtra, India, through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director.

2. State Bank of India, through the Chief General Manager, Local Head Office, Sector 17, Chandigarh.

3. State Bank of India, NRI Branch, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh through its Chief Manager.

4. Smt. Rajni Pandey wife of Chander Parkash Pandey, Flat No.1678, Pushpac Society, Sector

49-B, Chandigarh – 160047.

Second Address:-

Smt. Rajni Pandey daughter of Sh. Varender Dutt, House No.348, Milk Colony, Dhanas, U.T. Chandigarh.

….. Opposite Parties BEFORE: - MR.PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER Present:- Sh.Dinesh Madra, Advocate for the Complainant.

Sh.Sumit Narang, Advocate for Opposite Parties No.1 to 3.

Sh.Pardeep Sharma (Sankhian), Advocate for Opposite Party No.4.

PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER Facts, shorn of unnecessary details, as they appear from the record are that the Complainant - The Punjab Heritage & Tourism Promotion Board has been constituted by the Govt. of Punjab vide notification dated 14.08.202 and subsequently, registered as a Public Charitable Trust on 05.12.2002 through a Deed of Declaration. The Complainant was a consumer of the Opposite Parties having opened Bank A/c No. 65007140039 with Opposite Party No.3 at Chandigarh. Opposite Party No.4 – Mrs. Rajni Pandey was working as Senior Accountant in the Complainant Board who has since resigned from the post. During her tenure, financial discrepancies in the records of the Bank were detected and it was found that an amount of 50,000/- was withdrawn by said Mrs. Rajni Pandey vide Cheque No. 987960 dated 10.12.2020 from the Bank; whereas, in the Cheque Control Register said Cheque was shown as cancelled by her. This led to suspicion and on scrutiny, it was found that Cheque No.987963 dated 16.12.2020 drawn on the State Bank of India, Sector 8 Branch, Chandigarh was issued for 60,000/- and it was tampered to 90,000/-. However, the Bank negligently allowed the payment against the tempered Cheque. After detection of the above said unauthorized payment by the Bank, suspicion further arose and it was decided to examine the record of the previous years if there are any other similar payments made by the Bank. Then it came out that due to the negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Bank, an amount of 26,04,092/- lying in the aforesaid bank account, was transferred to the account of Outlook Express Limited on the basis of scanned and fabricated letters on several occasions through RTGS/NEFT forwarded by Mrs.Rajni Pandey without insisting for the originals. In similar fashion, huge amount of 19,58,850/- was transferred in the name of Aradhana Sharma on several occasions, with whom the Complainant Board had absolutely no dealings, on the basis of manipulated scanned documents sent by Mrs.Rajni Pandey. Thereafter, amount of 8,00,000/-

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top