APPEARED AT THE TIME OF ARGUMENTS

ORDER

C.VISWANATH

1. The present Appeal is filed by the Appellants under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against Order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Complaint No. 27/2015 dated 07.04.2016.

2. The case of the Appellants/Complainants is that they were jointly allotted safe deposit locker No. 68 in the Respondent Bank on an annual rental basis, as per the terms and conditions of the agreement.The Appellants deposited their valuable gold jewellery / ornaments weighing 873 grams in a metallic jewellery box which was duly locked and thereafter kept in the safe deposit locker.They also put a private lock on their locker.The Appellants were regularly operating their locker.On 1.09.2014 and 17.09.2014, the locker was found not opening properly and the custodian had to forcefully open the same.On 20.10.2014 when they operated their locker, they found the jewellery box missing.The theft of the jewellery was informed to the custodian as well as to the Branch Manager, both of whom were not responsive.They told that the Bank had no liability towards the items kept in safe deposit locker of the customers.The Appellants thereafter informed the Police who registered an FIR.The Police sought for recording/footage of the CCTV cameras, but were informed that the one installed in front of the strong room was not working from 13.09.2014 to 20.10.2014.The Appellants also sent a legal notice and filed a complaint before the State Commission.In the complaint case the complainant prayed:

   “1.     to direct non complainant/opposite party to pay the Complainants with the market Gold price of the gold thus stolen at the date of incidence which is 873 grams * 2650/- = 23,12,450/- and average making charge of 873 Grams # 215/- = 187695/- which is total to 2501145/-.

   2.      To provide the Complainant with the amount of Rs.500000/- for the mental trauma and stress caused by the Non Complainant/Opposite Party due to their deficiency in services.

   3.      To provide the Complainants with damages of Rs.2500000/- for the deficiency in the services by Non Complainant/Opposite Party.

   4.                To provide for the costs of litigation of Rs.7000/- and Advocate Expenditure of Rs.50000/- totaling to Rs.57000/-.

   5.      Any other order as you may deem fit.”

3. The Complaint was contested by the Respondents.According to the Respondents, the Appellants were operating the locker in pursuance of Locker Rent Agreement.Clause 13 of the same clearly stipulated that the relation between the Bank and the Appellants is that of a Licensor and Licensee and not of a Bank and a customer.According to the agreement executed between the parties, the Bank would not be responsible for damage of any it