LexGURGAON GRAMIN BANK versus SMT. KHAZANI & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 8 S.C.R. 225 GURGAON GRAMIN BANK v. SMT. KHAZANI & ANR. (Civil Appeal No. 6261 of 2012) SEPTEMBER 4, 2012 [K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] A B Insurance - Purchase of buffalo after taking loan from Bank -Insurance of buffalo for Rs. 150001- through Bank - Insurance claim not heeded to - Complaint before District C Consumer Forum - Claim allowed with Rs. 30001- cost - Bank approaching State Commission - Appeal rejected - Banks' revision petition before National Commission a/so rejected - On appeal, held: Courts jurisdiction not to be invoked for trivial matters unless serious questions of law of general D importance or a question which affects large number of persons arise or the stakes are very high - In the instant case no important question of law is to be decided - The Gamin Bank should stand for the benefit of the gramins and not to drag them to various litigative forums - For an amount of Rs. E 150001- the Bank has spent on litigation more than Rs. 25,0001- - Appeal dismissed - Cost of Rs. 10000 imposed on the Bank to be paid to the claimant. F The first respondent took a loan from the appellant- Bank to purchase a buffalo and the same was insured for Rs. 15000/- with the second respondent-Insurance Company. On the death of the buffalo, when her insurance claim through the Bank was not heeded to, she filed a complaint before District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. The complaint was allowed. Bank's G appeal to State Commission was dismissed. Bank approached National Commission, by filing Revision Petition, which was dismissed. Hence the present appeal was filed before this Court. On the query of this Court, 225 H 226 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012) 8 S.C.R. A the Bank filed an affidavit stating that the amount spent on the dispute relating to this case by the Bank was Rs. 12,950/-. B Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Unless, serious questions of law of general importance arise for consideration or a question which affects large number of persons or the stakes are very high, courts jurisdiction cannot be invoked for resolution of small and trivial matters. The manner in which those C types of matters are being brought to courts even at the level of Supreme Court of India is disturbing. This case falls in that category. The issues raised before this Court are purely questions of facts examined by the three forums including the National Disputes Redressal D Commission and there is no important question of law to be decided by the Supreme Court. These types of litigation should be discouraged and message should also go, otherwise for all trivial and silly matters people will rush to this court. [Paras 2 and 12) (228-B-C; 232-B] E 2. Gramin Bank like the appellant should stand for the benefit of the gramins who sometimes avail of loan for buying buffaloes, to purchase agricultural implements, manure, seeds and so on. Repayment, to a large extent, depends upon the income which they get out of that. F Crop failure, due to drought or natural calamities, disease to cattle or their death may cause difficulties to gramins to repay the amount. Rather than coming to their rescue, banks often drive them to litigation leading them to extreme penury. Assuming that the bank is right, but once G an authority like District Forum takes a view, the bank should graciously accept it rather than going in for further litigation and even to the level of Supreme Court. Driving poor gramins to various litigative forums should be strongly deprecated because they have also to spend H GURGAON GRAMIN BANK v. KHAZANI & ANR. 227 large amounts for conducting litigation. This type of A practice is condemnned unless the stake is very high or the matter affects large number of persons or affects a general policy of the Bank which has far reaching consequences. [Para 13] [232-C-F] 3. There is no error in the decisions taken by all fact- find in g authorities including the National Disputes Redressal Commission. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the bank B to the first respondent within a period of one month. The C Bank has to spend altogether Rs.25,950/- for a claim of Rs.15,000/-, apart from to and fro travelling expenses of the Bank officials. [Para 14] [232-G-H] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6261 of 2012. D Form the Judgment & Order dated 25.11.2009 of the National Con
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.