MRS.BABY GEORGE vs GENERAL MANAGER, BANK OF INDIA

THIS is an appeal against the order dated 6th November, 1991 passed by the Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Thiruvananthapuram by which the State Commission dismissed the complaint filed by the present Appellant leaving her to seek her remedy in a suit. Feeling aggrieved by that order the Complainant has come before this Commission by way of this appeal. Here we may mention that the Opposite Parties in the complaint were the General Manager, Bank of India, Nariman Point, Bombay, Regional Manager, Bank of India, Ernakulam and the Branch Manager, Bank of India, Shanmugham Road, Ernakulam.

THE case of the Complainant was that she was the Proprietrix of a small industrial concern doing its business under the name and style of "Spares Industries" at Vyttila, Ernakulam District in Kerala. She was operating current account with the Respondent Bank at its Branch at Shanmugham Road, Ernakulam. Later it was found that the third Opposite Party unauthorisedly transferred huge amount from the Complainant''s account to various other accounts. According to the Complainant this action of the Bank has caused a total loss of Rs. 4,57,986/- to her. In the complaint she prayed for that amount. The complaint was contested by the Opposite Parties and the main plea was that certain funds were transferred from the Complainant''s account to other accounts and that was done with the consent and approval of the Complainant. It was also alleged that in either of the accounts the Appellant Mrs.Baby George was either proprietrix or guarantor. It was also pleaded that the Complainant was challenging transfer of funds from one account to another and these transactions were going on for nearly ten years. There are hundreds of entries in various accounts. The accounts pertain to two firms which are owned by the Appellant and her husband. The books of accounts and impugned entries had been kept and maintained by different officers of the Bank at different times. It will require examination of all the witnesses and recording of their evidence as the Respondents contention is that the transfer of funds was made with the consent and approval of the Appellant. It will also require detailed scrutiny of the various letters, vouchers and correspondence between the Bank and the two constituents lasting for a very long time and therefore, the State Commission has rightly held that the matter was fit for adjudication by the Civil Court.

AFTER hearing the parties we are of the opinion that the order passed by the State Commission does not require any interference. From the documents filed by the Bank as well as the order of the State Commission it is clear that the Complainant is seeking relief in respect of transactions extending over a decade. The State Commission has rightly remarked: "Whether the claim is true or not, the inquiry will involve verification of the accounts of the Bank for over a decade, examination of several witnesses including officers of the Branch who were in charge of the complainant''s account. This will not be a simple and easy process. It will be long drawn out process which can best be done in a civil suit. We therefore dismiss the complaint leaving the complainant to seek her remedy in a suit."

PROCEEDINGS before Consumer Forum have to be disposed of within a time frame. If the present inquiry is taken by a Consumer Forum it will not be possible to dispose it of within the time frame. Here we may mention that in this appeal the opposite parties have taken up one more plea to the effect that the subject matter has already been heard by a Civil Court in the suit filed by the Opposite Parties against the complainant and in that case a decree has been passed in favour of the Bank. We need not go into that plea as the complainant is being asked to have the dispute decided by a Civil Court. It will be open to the present respondents to take the pleas available to them in case the complainant-appellant chooses to file a suit.

FOR the reasons given above, we do not find any force in the present appeal and dismiss the same with costs which we assess at Rs. 1,000/-.