Order dictated by:

Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.

1.       Ajay Singh, complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 and 13 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  on the allegations that complainant is having bank account No. 630310110001640 which was opened on 14.1.2008 with opposite party No.1. As a matter of fact that complainant is holder  of cheque bearing No.786141 for Rs. 40000/-  drawn on State Bank of India, branch Majitha Road, Amritsar drawn by Satnam  Singh for encashment . On 22.1.2016 complainant presented the aforesaid cheque and the same has been encashed on 25.1.2016 and entry to that effect was duly made in the account of the complainant with opposite party No.1. As a matter of fact before presenting  the cheque complainant was having balance of  Rs. 2,98,285.10 and after encashment of the aforesaid cheque, balance of complainant  with opposite party No.1 came to be Rs. 3,38,285.10 paise. It was a matter of great surprise for the complainant that on 6.2.2016, the  complainant went to opposite party No.1 for making entry in his pass book from where opposite party No.1 informed  the complainant that Rs. 40,000/- has been sent back to the concerned bank from where the aforesaid cheque was drawn. The complainant requested opposite party No.1  that as to how opposite party No.1  has previously credited the amount of Rs. 40000/- in his aforesaid bank account lying with opposite party No.1. In this behalf  complainant issued NOC to Satnam  Singh with the remarks that there is nothing  due towards Satnam Singh drawer of the aforesaid cheque. The complainant has been repeatedly requesting  opposite party No.1 as well as Satnam Singh but they did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. Thereafter, opposite party No.2 Sh. Uma Shankar approached the complainant over his mobile No. 9915111493 from the landline number of opposite party No. on 10.2.2016 and requested the complainant to hand over the original cheque and further asked the complainant that  amount shall be  credited to the account of the complainant. On the firm assurance of opposite party No.2, complainant handed over the original cheque to opposite party No.2 and amount of cheque was duly credited in the  bank account of the complainant on the same day i.e. 10.2.2016. Later on again opposite  parties No.1 to 3 with malafide intention and with criminal intimidation, again the amount of cheque was debited from the account of the complainant. On 23.2.2016, the fact was duly intimated to the complainant. On 25.2.2016 complainant moved an application before Bank of India , Branch Vijay Nagar, Amritsar opposite party No.2 and again moved two other applications on 8.3.2016 and 18.3.2016 to opposite parties No. 1 to 3. But the complainant is suffering a lot due to wrongful and illegal acts committed  by opposite parties No.1 to 3, who are hand in glove with each other. The complainant also got issued a legal notice  calling upon the opposite party No.1 to credit the amount of Rs.  40000/- in the account of the complainant but to no effect. The complainant has sought for following reliefs vide instant complaint:-

(i)      Opposite parties be directed to credit the amount of Rs. 40000/- in the account of the complainant alongwith interest @ 24% p.a from the date when the cheque was presented with opposite party No.1 till its actual realization to the complainant.

(ii)     Compensation of Rs. 40000/- may also be awarded to the complainant as well as litigation expenses be also awarded.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint written statement on behalf of opposite parties taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that complaint against the opposite parties is legally not maintainable ; that complainant has concealed the material facts  regarding the controversy and has not come to the court with clean hands ; that present complaint is bad for non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties. State Bank of India, Majitha Road, Amritsar branch through its branch manager is the necessary party to the present complaint as the said cheque in question is drawn on the said bank. Opposite party No.2 has been wrongly impleaded in the present complaint. Opposite party  No.2 is not personally liable for any alleged act to be done in his official capacity ; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, as such the present complaint is liable to be dismissed against the opposite party. On merits, it is admitted that complainant had deposited the cheque bearing No. 786141 for Rs. 40000/- with opposite party No.1 Bank of India for its encashment through clearing. It is submitted that the said cheque was issued by Sh. Satnam Singh from his account No. 10067854236. Opposite party No.1 being the clearing agent has sent the said cheque for its encashment through clearing to the drawee bank i.e.  State Bank of India. But the said cheque has been received back duly dishonoured and accordingly, opposite party No.1 Bank of India debited the amount of the cheque in question in the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant . Thereafter complainant  lodged a complaint on 8.2.2016 with opposite party No.1 Bank of India, Vijay Nagar Branch, Amritsar. Therefore, the opposite party has again credited the amount of cheque of Rs. 40000/- on 10.2.2016 to the account  of the complainant by debiting the same from the office account of the opposite party hoping  that the cheque will be subsequently cleared by State Bank of India. Thereafter, State Bank of India has demanded the amount from opposite party Bank of India on account of counter return  and also handed over the statement of account  of the account of Sh. Satnam  Singh bearing account No. 10067854236 which shows that  there was insufficient balance in the said account and due to this reason the cheque has not been honoured. Thus the said amount has been returned to State Bank of India and opposite party has debited the amount of the cheque of Rs. 40000/-  from the account of the complainant on 23.2.2016. It is further submitted that opposite party has not  received the proceeds of the cheque in question from State Bank of India, thus, the question of crediting the said amount in favour of the complainant does not arise at all. Thereafter the opposite party contacted Sh. Satnam Singh, who had issued the cheque in question in order to know the fact regarding the amount payable by him to the complainant. Satnam Singh has provided the copy of the written compromise effected between Ajay Singh complainant and Sh.Satnam Singh regarding the amount of the cheque in question. Said Satnam Singh had informed the opposite party Bank of India that a sum of Rs. 80000/- has been paid by him on account of the compensation regarding the road accident took place between Smt. Menu Singh mother of the complainant Sh. Ajay Singh and  Shri Lovejeet Singh son of Sh. Satnam  Singh on 3.10.2015. Satnam Singh had paid Rs. 40000/- in cash and Rs. 40000/- by way of cheque in question. Satnam Singh had also informed  that he had not sufficient funds in his account lying with State Bank of India and thus a compromise has been effected between him and Sh.Ajay Singh, complainant and he had paid Rs. 29000/- on 24.11.2015 and Rs. 11000/- on 9.3.2016 to Sh.Ajay Singh against the cheque in question. Therefore, the entire amount has been received by the complainant from Satnam Singh and the complainant is not entitled to claim any amount on the basis of the cheque in question. The complainant  has not suffered any loss due to  dishonour of the cheque in question. The complainant has misused the cheque in question even after the receipt of the amount by him from Sh.Satnam Singh. Said Satnam Singh has also submitted his duly sworn affidavit in this  regard. The complainant has concealed the material facts from the notice of this Forum and filed the present complaint on false grounds and false allegation knowingly fully well that the complainant is not entitled to receive any further amount on the basis of the cheque in question. The complainant  has also  filed a false complaint to Reserve Bank of India and Banking Ombudsman which has been duly replied  by the opposite parties and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost has been made.

3.       In his bid to prove the case complainant tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-10 and closed his evidence.

4.       To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Kulwant Singh,Adv.counsel for the opposite parties No.1,2 & 3 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Bimal Chander, Sr.Manager Ex.OP1,2,3/1 alongwith documents Ex.OP1,2,3/2 to Ex.OP1,2,3/8 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite parties No.1,2 & 3.

5.       We have  heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

6.       On the basis of the evidence on record, ld.counsel for the complainant has contended that Satnam Singh had issued cheque bearing No.786141 for Rs. 40000/- in favour of the complainant drawn on State Bank of India, branch Majitha Road,Amrtisar . The complainant presented the said cheque for encashment with his banker Bank of India, Branch Vijay Nagar, Batala Road, Amritsar . The amount in dispute was deposited/ debited from the account of the complainant on two occasions, copy of the statement of account accounts for Ex.OP1,2,3/5. The complainant issued legal notice calling upon the branch manager, Bank of India, Branch Amritsar, copy whereof is Ex.C-6 enquiring the reason for depositing and debiting the cheque amount from the account of the complainant. But, however, no reply was given by the opposite party No.1 for the reasons best known to it. It is contended that opposite parties are deficient in service. No notice has been issued to the complainant before debiting the cheque amount from his account on two occasions. So much so, even the cheque in dispute has not been returned to the complainant alongwith memo, if any, for the reasons best known to opposite party No.1. It is contended that complainant is entitled for the relief claimed vide instant complaint and the complaint may be allowed accordingly.

7.       But, however, from the appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case, it becomes evident that the cheque in dispute was dishonoured  on account of “insufficient funds”. Document Ex.OP1,2,3/2 issued by State Bank of India, Centralised Clearing Processing Centre, Town Hall, Amritsar dated 26..5.2016 bears witness to the said fact. Once the cheque in dispute has been dishonoured on account of “insufficient funds” Bank of India cannot be held responsible for any deficiency in service. Moreover, State Bank of India  on which the cheque in dispute was drawn as well as Satnam Singh drawer of the cheque in dispute are necessary parties  for the proper adjudication of the present complaint. In the absence of both the aforesaid persons, instant complaint cannot be adjudicated  upon effectively. Moreover a perusal of  copy of compromise Ex.OP1,2,3/6 shows that the complainant has effected a compromise with Satnam Singh. Once the matter stood compromised in between Satnam  Singh & the complainant, no consumer dispute survives. It appears that the instant complaint has been  filed simply to  harass the opposite parties. If the complainant wanted to settle the matter through instant complaint, it was imperative for him to have arrayed State Bank of India as well as Satnam Singh as parties to the instant complaint . That not being the case, instant complaint as framed is not maintainable for want of non joinder of necessary parties. Even otherwise also the matter stood compromised inter-se parties.  The fact that the consumer complaint has been filed after mutual settlement, shows that instant complaint was false & frivolous. As such,instant complaint fails and the same is ordered to be dismissed accordingly. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 30.08.2016

/R/