Appellant had deposited
jewellery in the value of Rs. 4,26,160/- as detailed in Annexure-A to the
plaint. The respondent-bank on account of its misconduct and negligence did not
take proper care of the lockers and the strong room which were built at the
back of the building. The alleged strong room was made up affair and it was
made only of plywood, whereas it ought to have been made of iron and concrete.
All the 44 lockers in the alleged strong room of the respondent-bank were
broken by miscreants and the contents thereof were stolen. The value of the jewellery
which was kept in the locker by the appellants was Rs. 4,26,160/-. First
Information Report was lodged with the police on 9-1-1989. All the 44 locker
holders made representation to the defendant on 2-2-1989 by a registered
acknowledgment due pointing out the gross negligence and misconduct of the
respondent-bank in maintaining the lockers. A representation to this effect was
also made to the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, The Senior
Superintendent of Police, Amritsar, was also informed regarding the burglary.
The appellants made several representations to the defendant-bank, but the
respondent-bank went on to evade the demands on one pretext or the other. None
of the representations of the appellants was answered by the defendant-bank. In
the meantime, the police made a report on 21-7-1989 about the defective strong
room and the lockers therein. Since the bank had failed to return the
jewellery, the appellants were constrained to institute suit in the trial
Court. This Second Appeal has been directed against the judgment.
The Court find no merit in the present appeal. The same is,
therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
Post a Comment