CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION/FORUM CANNOT RULE ON COMPLAINTS INVOLVING "HIGHLY DISPUTED QUESTIONS OF FACTS" The original complainant ('respondent' in the present matter) filed a complaint against the appellant bank with the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) seeking directions against the bank to re-credit Rs 8 lakhs comprising two demand drafts ('DDs') of Rs 5 lakhs and Rs 3 lakhs into his Current Account. The respondent said he was the Managing Director of D-Cube Constructions (P) Ltd. and that the firm had other Directors. The bank created a Current Account in the respondent's company's name on April 13, 1995, and only the responder could handle the account. Due to a dispute between the respondent and one of the Directors, he sent a letter to the bank on January 8, 1997, prohibiting any withdrawals from the company's account. The court noted that, based on the circumstances of the case, there was no intentional defect, imperfection, weakness, or insufficiency in the performance of duty by bank personnel that could be considered 'deficiency in service' under Section 2(1)(g) of the 1986 Act. About the summary nature of procedures, the Court ruled that SCDRC and NCDRC could not rule on complaints involving strongly disputed factual issues or instances involving tortious conduct or crimes such as fraud or deceit. With a team of Consumer Law experts, Reddy & Reddy Law Firm has extensive experience and involvement in consumer disputes.