Tribunals and Commissions(2003) 03 NCDRC CK 0023

PITAMBER DEORAM MALI vs MANAGER, DHULE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OP. BANK LTD.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission · Decided on 28 March 2003 · Citation: 2003 4 CPJ 518 : 2004 1 CLT 169

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.S.Rane , V.K.Data J.
RESULT
Appeal dismissed

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 351 words
1.

NONE present on behalf of appellants as also respondents although the matter is listed on today''s Board in regular manner.

2.

THE consumer dispute is pending since 1997, initially before the District Forum and from 1998 before this Commission and as statute viz. Consumer Protection Act, 1986, mandates disposal of consumer disputes with speedy dispatch, we are proceeding to dispose this appeal with the material available before us. Few relevant facts : (For brevity''s sake appellant herein is referred to as "complainant" and respondent as "O.P./ Bank") The complainant has filed this appeal against dismissal of this complaint by the District Forum vide order dated 31.3.1998.

It is noticed that the complainant received Bank Draft being the price he received from concerned authorities for the sale of the cotton. The complainant had his account with the O.P.-Bank and he wanted to deposit the said cheque and after negotiation and clearance withdraw the amount thereunder for his other purpose.

3.

THE complainant deposited the same but the O.P.-Bank refused to pay him the amount, inter alia the Bank pointed out that the son of the complainant Mr. Bhatu had taken loan from the O.P.-Bank and at relevant time a sum of Rs. 2,100/- was outstanding against the loan liability. It is in these circumstances that the complaint was filed. The District Forum which was satisfied about the existence of loan liability which the son of the complainant the O.P.-Bank held that the refusal of O.P.-Bank to pay the money was justified. It is to be stated that the findings of the District Forum are just and needing no interference.

4.

THE record shows that the loan was secured by the complainant''s son as a member of joint family comprising of the complainant himself. As is known the Bank is entitled to exercise general right of lien for discharge of liabilities of the account holder like the complainant herein. That being so the order is just and fair. ORDER 1. Appeal stands dismissed. 2. No order as to cost. 3. Office to furnish copies of the order to the parties. Appeal dismissed.