DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.860/2009
M/s Taurus Export Int
presently at:
P-65, South Extension Part-II,
3rd Floor, New Delhi-110049
through its Authorized Signatory
Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singhi
18, Kapshera Estate,
New Delhi-110037 ….Complainant
Versus
M/s ABN AMRO BANK
Branch Office at:
Hansalaya Building,
Barakhamba Road,
New Delhi-110001 ……Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 04.12.09 Date of Order : 08.02.17
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
O R D E R
The complainant has filed the present complaint through its authorized signatory Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singhi.
Complainant’s case, in short, is that the Complainant was carrying business of export-import and having account No. 6533213 with the OP. The OP had issued cheque book containing cheques bearing No.446301 to 446350 (50 cheques). On 19.01.2006, the Complainant informed the OP that the said cheque book had been lost and as a precaution it issued ‘stop payment’ direction with regard to those cheques. Complainant had taken the said action immediately on the same day upon realizing that the said cheque book was lost.(copy of letter dated 19.01.2006 filed on the record). The OP bank acknowledged the same. The Complainant lodged a complaint with the Udyog Vihar Police Station, Gurgaon, Haryana on 22.01.2006. Vide letter dated 06.02.06 the complainant informed the OP bank that the cheque bearing No.446308 for an amount of Rs.3 lacs had been encashed from its account on 14.01.2006 through a forged signature of its partner; that a perusal of the cheque with mere naked eyes clearly revealed that the signature on the cheque was forged. The complainant called upon the OP to credit the account of the complainant with a sum of Rs. 300000/-but the OP denied their liability to pay the said amount of Rs.3 lacs. That the Respondent Bank vide its letter dated 08.02.2006 informed the complainant that the said cheque had been honoured on 17.01.2006 which was prior to the letter from the complainant intimating the Respondent Bank about the loss of cheque nos. 446301 to 446350 from a cheque book and issuing the ‘Stop Payment” instructions for the said cheques. The Respondent Bank denied all liability and refused to credit the account of the Complainant with the sum of Rs. 3,00,000. However, in the said letter the Respondent Bank did not state or refute the negligence on their part in allowing a payment to be made on a cheque which bore a forged signature. Hence, the defense of the Respondent Bank was not that the signature had not been forged, but that the Complainant had issued stop payment instruction to the Respondent Bank only on 19.01.2006. The Complainant sent a legal notice to the OP on 09.02.2007 which was replied vide letter dated 20.02.2007. The OP acted in a gross negligent manner by honouring a forged cheque and because of the careless attitude by the OP the Complainant suffered a huge loss. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of the OP the complaint has been filed with the following prayers:-
- Direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs.3 lacs with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till realization of the said sum,
- Direct the OP to pay a compensation of Rs.2 lacs for mental agony, harm and injury suffered by the Complainant due to the gross negligence and inaction on the part of the OP,
- Direct the OP bank to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- as litigation expenses.
In the written statement OP has inter-alia stated that the Complainant has disputed that a cheque No. 446308 for Rs.3 lacs had been encashed from its account on 17.01.06 through a forged signature of its partner and alleging that the OP had not verified the signature on the cheque leaf in dispute from the specimen signature. It is submitted that all the cheques which come for clearing to the bank are honoured only after duly verifying the signatures on the cheque, with those specimen signature on the record, and on being satisfied about the authenticity of the same. In the instant case, the cheque in question was part of the cheque book issued to the Complainant and when the cheque issued by the Complainant came for clearing the same was cleared only on being satisfied about the authenticity of the cheque. The Complainant issued stop payment request against the cheque in dispute only on 19.01.06 as admitted in the complaint which clearly establishes the fact that the Complainant had not intimated the OP regarding loss, theft, forgery prior to clearing of the cheque in question. At the time of encashment of the cheque in question i.e. 17.01.2006 the OP was not aware about any loss of cheque book of the Complainant and on 17.01.2006 there was no stop payment instruction on behalf of the Complainant. In the absence of any information regarding forgery or loss of cheque book the OP cannot be held negligent in clearing the cheque in question. It is submitted that the allegations raised by the complainant are with regard to fraud and misappropriation of money from the account of the complainant and as such the present complaint needs proper adjudication and hence, the present complaint cannot be heard and decided by this Forum. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder.
Affidavit of Sh. Ranjan Kumar Singhi, Authorized Signatory has been filed in evidence on behalf of the Complainant. On the other hand, affidavit of Ms. Alka Paul, representative has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the arguments on behalf of the OP and have also gone through the file very carefully.
We do not want to discuss the matter in detail. The complaint of the complainant is vexatious and frivolous and has been filed with an oblique motive for the simple reason that according to the complainant itself “stop payment” direction in respect of cheque book bearing cheque nos. 446301 to 446350 had been given to the OP bank on 19.01.06 and the OP bank acknowledged the same. According to the complainant itself cheque No.446308 dated 14.01.2006 for an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- had been encashed by the OP bank on 17.01.2006 i.e. much before the stop payment directions. Complainant must be deemed to have acquired knowledge of encashment of cheque No 446308 on 17.01.2006 itself. However the complainant did not disclose this fact before the OP bank on 19.01.2006. Investigation regarding forgery cannot be made by this Forum in summary procedure. Complainant was perhaps aware about this fact. Therefore the complainant filed the present complaint on 04.12.2009 with an application for condonation of delay which was allowed by one of our Predecessors vide order dated 30.12.2009 before issuing notice of the complaint to the OP. This fact also shows that the complainant has filed the present complaint after much deliberation. If the said cheque had been got cleared from the OP bank through forged signatures, the remedy of the complainant lay somewhere else and it did not certainly become a consumer dispute. Therefore, we hold that that the complaint is without any cause of action and is false and frivolous.
In view of the above discussion, we dismiss the complaint with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the complainant to the OP within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 08.02.17.
