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

Cause Title/Judgement-Entry
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UP
C-1 Vikrant Khand 1 (Near Shaheed Path), Gomti Nagar Lucknow-226010
 
Complaint Case No. CC/247/2019
( Date of Filing : 22 Aug 2019 )
 
1. Umakant Awasthi
S/O Late jageshwar Prasad R/O 22 Sanjay Nagar machhriya Road Near Hanuiman Mandir Naubasta Kanpur 208021 Nagar
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Union Bank Of India
Branch Office at 81 Pashupati Nagar Yashoda Nagar Kanpur Nagar 208011 Through Branch manager
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Vikas Saxena JUDICIAL MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 09 Dec 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Reserved

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Complaint No.247 of 2019

1- Umakant Awasthi, aged about 48 years, S/o Late

    Jageshwar Prasad, R/o 22, Sanjay Nagar,

    Machhriya Road, Near Hanuman Mandir,

    Naubasta, Kanpur Nagar-208021

2- Sudha w/o Umakant Awasthi, R/o 22, Sanjay Nagar,

    Machhriya Road, Near Hanuman Mandir,

    Naubasta, Kanpur Nagar-208021           ....Complainants.

Versus

1- Union Bank of India, Branch Office,

     At 81, Pashupati Nagar, Yashoda Nagar,

    Kanpur Nagar-208011 through Branch Manager.

 2- Union Bank of India, Regional Office,

     117/H-1/240, Model Town,  Pandu Nagar,

 3- Union Bank of India, Head Office, Union

     Bank Bhawan, 239, Vidhan Bhawan Marg,

     Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 through

     CEO/Managing Director.

4- Reserve Bank of India, Head Office, Main

    Building, P.O. Box 901, Shahid Bhagat Singh

    Road, Mumbai-400001 through Chief

    General Manager.                                    ….Opp. Parties.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar, President.

2- Hon’ble Sri Vikas Saxena, Member.

Sri Pramedra Verma, Advocate for complainants.

Sri Rajesh Chaddha, Advocate of OP no.1 to 3.

None for OP no.4.

Date 21.12.2022

JUDGMENT

Per Sri Vikas Saxena,  Member- The complainant Akhilesh Shivhare opened a joint savings bank account bearing account number 5517020100000624 at branch Pashupati Nagar, Yashoda Nagar, Kanpur Nagar of Union Bank of India, the opposite party. As per the complainant the branch manager offered a locker facility to the complainants on nominal fees and promise to provide highly secured strong room equipped

(2)

with modern technology security systems. On the assurance, the complainant applied for the locker facility and after fulfilling all the requirements and paying the requisite fees hired a locker facility at the branch office of the bank and got the locker number  17 (SC) and thus became a consumer of the opposite party. The complainant has   affirmed that he kept all his ornaments, jewelry and other valuable things including ornaments of son and daughter-in-law in this locker. The opposite party Bank gave one key to the complainant and kept another key with them apart of the master key.

According to complainant he and his family members including wife, son and daughter-in-law holds no other locker in any of the bank in India except this locker.

Allegedly, on date 17/18.02.2018 midnight a theft was committed by some unknown miscreants where in 32 lockers were broken open by cutting them with a gas cutter and all valuables were taken away by them. The complainant alleged that all valuable things including items of jewelry, ornaments and other valuable things were stolen from this particular locker number 17 (SC) which approximately value Rs.19,49,860/-(Rupees nineteen lacs fourty nine thousand eight hundred sixty). List of those stolen articles has been mentioned in the complaint.

The complainant has alleged that the theft was committed by the unknown miscreant due to lack of proper security and inadequate safety measures taken by the opposite party/ Bank. The complainant lost all the valuables kept in the locker received by him and his family members from ancestors. It is further indicated by the complainant that the

(3)

bank did not take adequate safety measures as per the no





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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top