ANVIL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD. vs GLOBAL TRUST BANK LTD.

IN this complaint the complainant has sought the following reliefs: "(1) A sum of Rs. 88,5,998 comprising the principal amount of Rs. 16,17,428.50 being the interest for 15 months calculated at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of notice dated 22nd June, 2000 till 30th September, 2001 as per the particulars of claim and further interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on the principal amount of Rs. 71,88,569.50 from the date of filing this complaint till payment and/or realisation for deficiency of service and ''negligence'' of the opposite party; (2) The opposite party is also bound and liable to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 50 lakh as and by way of liquidated damages towards loss of business, loss of reputation in the market, mental agony, humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience and hardship suffered and experienced by the complainant as set out in the particulars of claim along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till payment and/or realisation: (3) Costs of the complaint be provided for; (4) Such other and further reliefs as this Hon''ble Forum may deem fit and proper be passed."

WE have examined the complaint. This raises complex questions of law and facts. A great deal of evidence, both oral and documentary, will have to be lead. It is not possible for the Consumer Fora to try such cases in its summary jurisdiction. Moreover, in the case of Synoo Industries v. State Bank Of Bikaner & Jaipur & Ors., I (2002) CPJ 16 (SC)=I (2002) SLT 214=2002 (1) Scale 148, which went in appeal to the Hon''ble Supreme Court, the has also held as under: "Given the nature of the claim in the complaint and the prayer for damages in the sum of rupees fifteen crores and for an additional sum of Rs. sixty lakh for covering the cost of travelling and other expenses incurred by the appellant, it is obvious that very detailed evidence would have to be led, both to prove the claim and, thereafter, to prove the damages and expenses. It is, therefore, in any event, not an appropriate case to be heard and disposed of in a summary fashion. The National Commission was right in giving the appellant liberty to move the Civil Court. This is an appropriate claim for a Civil Court to decide and, obviously, was not filed before Civil Court to start with because, before the Consumer Forum, any figure in damages can be claimed without having to pay Court fees. This, in that sense, is an abuse of the process of the Consumer Forum."

The complaint is, therefore, dismissed. This will, however, not come in the way of the complainant to approach any other appropriate Forum for the reliefs claimed. Complaint dismissed.