M.P. Grih Nirman Mandal vs State Bank Of India & Ors.
2023 Latest Caselaw 14376 MP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                              BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
                  FIRST APPEAL NO. 80 OF 1998
      BETWEEN:-
      M.P.   GRIH   NIRMAN      MANDAL,
      THROUGH ESTATE OFFICER, M.P. GRIH
      NIRMAN    MANDAL,   REWA    NEAR
      JAISTAMBH, GHOGHER, REWA, TEHSIL
      HUZUR, DISTRICT REWA (M.P.)
                                                      .....APPELLANT
      (BY SHRI ADITYA KHANDEKAR - ADVOCATE)

      AND
      1.    STATE BANK OF INDIA, THROUGH
            MANGER, CITY BRANCH, REWA,
            TEHSIL HUZUR, DISTRICT REWA
            (M.P.)

      2.    STATE BANK OF INDIA, REGIONAL
            OFFICE,    NARIMAN      POINT,
            MADAME ROAD, MUMBAI (MAH).

      3.    STATE BANK OF INDIA, BRANCH
            MAHAVIR NAGAR, BHOPAL (M.P.)
                                                   ....RESPONDENTS

      (NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS)
      ...............................................................................................
           Reserved on :  24.08.2023
            Pronounced on :   02.09.2023

       This appeal having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming
on for pronouncement this day, the Court pronounced the following:
                                    -   2 -



                              JUDGMENT

This first appeal has been preferred by the appellant/plaintiff challenging the judgment and decree dated 10.11.1997 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Rewa in civil suit no.1-B/92, whereby plaintiff's suit filed for recovery of an amount of Rs.63,470/- has been dismissed.

2. The facts in short are that the appellant/plaintiff instituted a suit for recovery of an amount of Rs.63,470/- along with interest @ 16% p.a. against the respondents pleading inter alia that as per agreement the defendant 1 was to transfer the amount 4 times in a month deposited in collection a/c of the defendant 1 from regional branch Rewa to Bhopal branch but the defendant 1 deliberately did not transfer Rs.1,31,191.34 ps. to the Bhopal branch and keeping it in its Bank gained benefit, which after so many requests of the plaintiff was transferred on 06.09.1988, however an amount of Rs.6,000/- was not transferred and therefore the plaintiff incurred a loss and consequently claimed the aforesaid amount with interest against the defendants jointly and severally.

3. The defendants 1-3 appeared and filed separate written statement(s) denying the plaint allegations stating therein that the plaintiff had refused to pay/deposit the collection charges, therefore, the amount was not transferred in the plaintiff's a/c of Bhopal branch and further pleaded that the plaintiff's claim is time barred and deserves to be dismissed.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties learned trial Court framed as many as eight issues and recorded evidence of the parties. The plaintiff in support of its case examined R.K. Goutam (PW1) and produced

- 3 -

documents (Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/12). Similarly, the defendants examined K. Sukumaran (DW1), Prakash Shrivastava (DW2) and Suryabhan Singh Parihar (DW3) and produced documentary evidence (Ex.D/1 to Ex.D/16).

5. Thereafter, learned trial Court heard arguments and upon due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence did not find the case of plaintiff proved and dismissed the suit on merits as well as on the ground of limitation vide impugned judgment and decree dated 10.11.1997.

6. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree of trial Court, the plaintiff/appellant has preferred instant first appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff submits that learned trial Court has committed illegality in holding that the defendant 1 did not transfer the amount in the account of Bhopal branch of plaintiff for valid reasons and due to non-payment of collection charges, the defendant 1 did not transfer the amount in the plaintiff's account of Bhopal branch. He further submits that the plaintiff was exempted from payment of collection charges and because finally the defendant 1 transferred the amount without any collection charges, therefore, it should be presumed that the defendant 1 committed illegality in not transferring the amount before 06.09.1988, resultantly the plaintiff is entitled for interest on the deposited amount for the period from 05.01.1987 to 06.09.1988 as well as principal amount of Rs.6,000/- and interest thereon. In addition, he submits that learned Court below has committed illegality in holding the suit to be barred by limitation. With the aforesaid submissions, he prays for allowing the first appeal.

8. None is appearing for the respondents though served.

- 4 -

9. In the instant first appeal following points for determination are arising for consideration of this Court :

"1. Whether the defendant-State Bank had committed any illegality in not transferring the amount of Rs.1,31,191.34 ps. for want of collection charges ?

2. Whether the suit filed on 03.01.1992 in respect of the interest for the period prior to 07.09.1988 is barred by limitation ?"

10. From perusal of oral and documentary evidence available on record, it appears that there was business understanding in between the plaintiff and defendant 1 to transfer the amount deposited in collection a/c of the Rewa Branch to Bhopal Branch without any collection charges, but the written communication available on record shows that subsequently the defendant/Bank as per policy of Reserve Bank of India started taking collection charges and it was also informed to the all concerned.

11. A letter (Ex.D/8) shows that as per the directives issued by the Reserve Bank of India, the Branch Manager had no right to exempt anybody from the collection charges, therefore, for want of collection charges the amount of Rs.1,31,191.34 ps. deposited in the plaintiff's collection account of Rewa branch was not transferred to the plaintiff's account in branch Bhopal and it remained deposited in the account of Rewa Branch for the period from 05.01.1987 to 06.09.1988, over which the plaintiff is claiming interest by filing the instant civil suit.

12. It is clear on record that finally the said amount was transferred to the account in Bhopal branch on 07.09.1988. There is no reason available on record as to why the plaintiff itself did not send the amount to Bhopal

- 5 -

branch by withdrawing it from Rewa Branch and why he kept the amount deposited in the Rewa branch.

13. Learned Court below has upon due consideration of the evidence, held that the plaintiff has failed to prove that the defendant 1 deliberately did not transfer the amount in the Bhopal Branch and has breached the terms and conditions of agreement allegedly executed in between the plaintiff and defendant 1. In fact there exists no written agreement in between the parties to transfer the amount from Rewa Branch to Bhopal Branch without any collection charges. As such the defendant 1/Bank did not commit any illegality in not transferring the amount without collection charges.

14. Further, the plaintiff has come with the case that it is entitled for the amount of interest for the period from 05.01.1987 to 06.09.1988 and further amount of interest on interest along with an amount of Rs.6,000/- remained deposited in the Bank, which has not been found proved to be deposited. The present suit was filed on 03.01.1992, therefore, learned Court below while deciding the issue no.7 has rightly held the suit to be barred by limitation for the amount of interest fell due after 06.09.1988.

15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, in my considered opinion learned Court below has not committed any illegality in dismissing the suit in its entirety.

16. Resultantly, first appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. However, no order as to costs.

17. Interim application(s), if any, shall stand dismissed.

(DWARKA DHISH BANSAL) JUDGE

- 6 -

pb

Digitally signed by PRASHANT BAGJILEWALE Date: 2023.09.04 11:27:34 +05'30'