(- HIGH COURT OF THE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPR U HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SIN & ‘ HON’BLE SHRIR.N.I'CHANDRAKAR‘ J J CORAM: Distt Cp-operative Cetral Bk ric ' n ap L as r ts b ent eu Drstrrct Cto-opetlve Centl Bak ; ra ra n Ltd., Branch- hampa Disict C, tr Jaji ’Chmpa, through Brnch 'ngr —a a Mag ak K S, a si f l- hamp is Jr— Writ Appeal uls 2 (1) of the Chhattlsqarh Hiqh Court (Appeal to Dlvrsmn Bench) Act 2006 Apearance p- Mr H V Sharma Advocat forthe respondet e n 09.0.01) Foowng orer of the .Cou was lli d rt pad by sse () 1 Hd o adii ear n msson. e ls a l hi ai atd Th appelant/Bank hve fed ts appeal ganst the order de ‘ 5“ of October 2010 passed In Wrlt etition No 161 1/2004 y he ‘ P b t learned Single Jude of tis our g h Ct 7 (2) $ HA Writ Appeal No. 65 ofi2011 i § td., Dist Bilpur though I General Manager ut at pres Chief Exctrve Offcer i APPELLANTS aner Versus NndishOre anwar Slo Dashrath : ingh agedpbout 25 years, - Redent o Puchheli; Tehsi Ca, Dt. anjgiChampa i RESPONDENT v Mr S L Kurml Advocate forthe appellants ORAL ORDER (521 SUNIU KUMAR SINHA, J. 2 . ‘50 W.P.No. 65 of2011 ' ’1; The respondent isa saving account holder in Champa Branch of ;appellant’s Bank. He had made Seyerai deposits in his account. A \ gsum of Rs.30,000/¥ was withdrawn by someone on 12.2.2004 and ianother sum of Rs.40,000/— was wihdrawn on 19.2.2004 by Ssomeone from the account of the respondent. When respondent ,came to know about this, he made complaint on 21.2.20044 ' iThereafter another application was made on 25.2.2004. One Qfiicer of the Bank made an enquiry and a F.l.R. against an i unknown person, stating that a sum of Rs.70,000/— was withdraWn i thy someone by forged Signatures from the account of the. ‘V respondent was lodged Accordingly, a case was registered a jagalnst the unknown person ulss 419 420 467 468 & 471 of g Indian Penal Code The respondent thereafter fled a writ petition i seeking direction to the appellants’to deposit Rs.70,000l— In the :i _ t _ accOunt ofthe respondent. I i ; The learned Single Judge obserVed that the money is deposited in ¥ a Bank account on the basis of trust and‘itr is for the Bank Officials g ' ‘ t ' « to ensure that money of the accoum holder is safe and secure and, i - the same cannot be withdraWn by any other person fraudulently. - The learned Single Judge further obserVed that when the fact of _ not verlt‘catlon of the srgnature of some other person has been- admitted the respondent cannot be faulted wrth and cannot suffer ‘ on account of Withdrawal by some other person The respondent : therefore was entitled to the said amount wrth Interest as the : e. respondent was deprived the use of the money for the period from. , ' February, 2004 till date The learned Single Judge therefore. i t 3 (9K W.P. No. 65 of 201 1% \ Edirected the appellants"to deposit a sum of -Rs.70,000/- with ;interest at the rate of’12% per annum from the date of withdrawals € ‘till deposit in the account of the respondent. (5) EWe gather from the records that on enquiry by the Bank Officer, it was found that there was difference in the signatures put over the withdrawai forms and'specimen signatures of the respondent and even after that the withdrawal formsfwere passed for making payments. (6) Cjonsideringthe above factual aspects'of the matter; we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge f, _ Warranting‘ interference in this writ appeal. (7) The appeal is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. l y ‘ l Sd/_ . /¢’ // ”y _ RANGANATH CHANDRAKAR i Judge t Judge 7/