IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE : Hon’ble Thiru Justice R. SUBBIAH PRESIDENT F.A.NO.468/2022 (Against order in CC.NO.3/2012 on the file of the DCDRC, Vellore)

DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF MARCH 2025

1. The Chief Manager State Bank of India Code No.0934 Tirupattur Krishnakiri Road, Tirupattur Town Vellore District (Presently Tirupattur District) 2. The Divisional Manager State Bank of India TMK Complex, 3^rd Floor No.46/51, Katpadi Road, Vellore – 4

3. The Regional Manager For Tamil Nadu & Pondy State Bank of India No.16, College Lane M/s. S. Makesh Circle Top Office Counsel for Chennai – 600 006 Appellants /Opposite parties Vs.

I. Shajakhaan S/o. Ismail Khan No.347, TNHB, Phase II Tirupattur Town M/s. R. Deepak Vellore District Counsel for (Presently Tirupattur District) Respondent / Complainant The Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties, praying for certain direction. The District Commission had allowed the complaint in part as against the opposite parties. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the opposite parties praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt.21.7.2022 in CC.No.3/2012.

This appeal is coming before me for hearing finally today, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel appearing for appellant and upon perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following order in the open court:

ORDER

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT (Open court)

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/ opposite parties as against the order dt.21.7.2022 in CC.No.3/2012 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Vellore, in allowing the complaint in part.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred as per the rankings before the District Commission.

3. The brief facts which are necessary to decide the appeal are as follows: The complainant had pledged 8 items of the gold ornaments weighing about

35 sovereigns, on 27.12.2008, with the Thirupattur Branch of opposite party bank, for a sum of Rs.2,36,000/- for the agreed interest @ 7% p.a., At the time of pledging the above said gold ornaments by the complainant, one Mr.Muniraj was working as a Manager, and one Mr.Jaisankar was working as an Accountant and one Mr.Babanasam was working as a cashier in the said bank. These three persons had received the gold ornaments, by adopting the prescribed procedures. In March 2010, he approached the opposite party for redemption of jewels by paying the principal and the interest amount. When he met Mr.Rajagopal, the then Manager of the opposite party bank, had informed the complainant, that the previous officers, who were incharge for the pledging of gold jewels, have committed some fraud, misappropriation and looted the pledged jewels from the bank, including the complainant’s, alongwith someother persons jewels. A police complaint also lodged before the Inspector of Police, DCB, Vellore District, which was registered in Cr.No.23/2010 on 20.4.2010. The above said action of the police case is in no way connected or binding on the complainant. The loss of jewels was due to the carelessness and the failure of their official duty. In this regard, the complainant gave a complaint to the Inspector of Police, Thirupattur Town on 8.11.2011. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite parties on 25.11.2011. Hence, alleging negligence on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission, praying for a direction to the opposite parties to return 45 sovereigns of gold, or to return the value of 45 sovereign of gold jewels alongwith making charges of the ornaments, alongwith compensation of Rs.1 lakh.

4. The case of the complainant was resisted by the 1^st opposite party, by filing version as follows:

The complainant had pledged 8 items of gold ornaments, weighing about 45