ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.618 of 2019 Date of institution : 18.09.2019 Reserved on : 28.03.2022 Date of decision : 07.04.2022 Ram Ishwar Yadav son of Sh. Kanhaiya Yadav, R/o H.No.94, Gobind Nagar, Railway Station Road, Malerkotla, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur.

…..Appellant/Complainant Versus State Bank of India, Branch Office : College Road, Malerkotla, Tehsil Malerkotla, District Sangrur, through its Branch Manager-148023.

….Respondent/Opposite Party First Appeal under Section 15 the Consumer Protection Act, against the order dated 31.05.2019 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (now ‘Commission’), Sangrur.

Quorum:-

Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goyal, Presiding Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Pardeep Singh, Advocate For respondent : None KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant/complainant against the order dated 31.05.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sangrur (in short, now “the District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed by complainant against opposite party (in short ‘OP’), under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, was dismissed. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced as under:-

“6……….. As proceedings before the Consumer Forum are summary in nature, but allegations of forgery leveled in this case requires elaborate evidence and as such, complainant, if advised may approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction because complex question of law and facts qua fraud can be decided by that Court and not in these summary proceedings”.

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal are that the complainant was having a saving bank account No.31162067573 with OP Bank and had been availing ATM Card facility and on every transaction, message was being sent on the registered mobile No.98144-84053 of the complainant. On 25.10.2017, an unidentified and unknown person fraudulently exchanged the ATM card from the son of the complainant in ATM House situated at Truck Union, Near Kewal Shiv Mandir, Malerkotla. The ATM card, which was fraudulently handed over to the son of the complainant, was in the name of one Kalyan Singh Rajput of Udaipur. The said unidentified person, in connivance with the officials of OP, just to usurp huge amount and to play fraud upon the complainant, first stopped message service on the registered mobile phone of the complainant and thereafter withdrew the total amount of Rs.2,77,902/- on various dates and misutilized the same. The complainant was unaware about the said transactions as no message was sent on the registered mobile phone of the complainant by the OP. The complainant came to know about the said illegal transactions on 14.11.2017 when he went to ATM for withdrawal of amount. He approached OP, who assured the complainant that whole amount would be reversed. But OP did not initiate any action in the said matter. Therefore, the complainant lodged an FIR No.121 dated 24.11.2017 under Section 420 IPC, at P.S.City-1, Malerkotla against unknown person, but nothing was recovered. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, the complainant filed the consumer complaint before the District Commission and sought refund of Rs.2,77,902/- along with interest @18% p.a. and compensation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- on account of mental tension, agony and physical harassment and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.

4. The complaint was contested by the OP, who filed written reply before the District Commission. In its written reply, OP raised certain legal objections, inter alia, that the complainant has alleged the commission of fraud and cheating with him by fraudster and lodged FIR under section 420 IPC before the policy authorities, therefore, the complaint was not maintainable before Dist