STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI APPEAL No.A/19/1167 (Arising out of order dated 09/10/2019 in CC/19/115 passed by District Commission, Central Mumbai)

Mr.Vincent D’Souza Pearl Colony, A/5, 1^st floor ...Appellant/org.complainant Dr.Ambedkar Road Dadar (E), Mumbai 400 014 Versus Central Bank of India Naigaum, Dadar (East) ………Respondent/org.OP Mumbai 400 014 BEFORE: Justice S.P.Tavade – President Vijay C.Premchandani – Member Appellant in person PRESENT:

Adv J.K.Jadhav for respondent/Central Bank of India FINAL ORDER (Dt.20/03/2026)

Per Hon’ble Justice S.P.Tavade – President

1. The appellant/original complainant has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 09/10/2019 passed by the Ld.District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai in consumer complaint no.CC/19/115. It is contended in the appeal memo that the Ld.District Consumer Commission has not given fair opportunity to lead the evidence and disposed of the consumer complaint without considering the documentary evidence on record.

2. The appeal was admitted and the notice was issued to the respondent. Learned advocate for the respondent appeared and written submissions were filed.

3. Heard appellant who is present in person and learned advocate for the respondent. We perused the impugned order. It appears that the Ld.District Consumer Commission has observed that the complainant is agitating about Rs.40/- less amount, which was not credited to the account of his mother. It is further observed that the entry no.4 in the challan is related to his late mother Mrs.Hilda D’Souza. Therefore, it was held that the complainant has no locus standi to agitate the issue. It appears that the complainant is the nominee of his mother. Therefore, he has right to agitate the entries. But the Ld.District Consumer Commission has dismissed the consumer complaint on the ground that the complainant has no locus standi to agitate the entries made in the account of his mother. In fact, the complainant is the beneficiary. Therefore, the Ld.District Consumer Commission ought to have considered other documents on record and should have admitted the consumer complaint by giving chance to other side to disprove the allegations. But it appears that the Ld.District Consumer Commission has already dismissed the consumer complaint on the point of locus standi. We have already observed that the complainant is the nominee of his mother. Therefore, he can agitate the issue relating to the account of his mother. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the complaint is required to be sent back to the Ld.District Consumer Commission for fresh trial. Hence, we pass the following order:-

ORDER

1. Appeal is allowed.

2. The impugned order passed by the Ld.District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai in consumer complaint no.CC/19/115 dated 09/10/2019 is hereby set aside.

3. The consumer complaint no.CC/19/115 is admitted.

4. The Ld.District Consumer Commission, Central Mumbai is directed to issue notice to the respondent/original opponent for hearing and after hearing both the parties, decide the consumer complaint on merits. The opponent is at liberty to file their written statement as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.

5. No order as to costs.

6. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost.

[Justice S.P. Tavade]

President [Vijay C. Premchandani]

Member Ms.