Bihar

Muzaffarpur

CC/41/2011

Abdul Rahim Siddki, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, Central Bank Of India - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Amar Nath And Ajay Kumar Raut

21 Feb 2015

ORDER

 

District Consumer Forum, Muzaffarpur

                 Complain Case No. - 41/2011.

Abdul Rahim Siddki. S/o –Mohamad Nasrudin,  Mohalla - Satpura P.S. –Kazi -Mohamdpur, District- Muzaffarpur……………. Complainant

V/s

Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Branch- Mithanpura,  Distt- Muzaffarpur  ………………….. Opposite Party.

                        Date of order- 21-02-2015

                                                                                                  Present.

1. Shri Govind Prasad Singh

                                                                                           President,

       Consumer Forum Muzaffarpur

2.  Smt. Archana Singh- Member

        Consumer Forum Muzaffarpur

 

Advocate for complainant –Shri Amar Nath and Ajay Kumar Raut.                       

Advocate for Opposite Party-Shri Pramod Kumar Sharma  and Amar Kumar.

 

Order

Complainant has filed this case for recovery of Rs. 2,00000/-(Two lakh only) for financial, mental and physical damage as compensation and Rs. 10,000/- For the cost of the suit with 9 percent interest per annum  at the amount of his cheque which he had deposited for payment.

The allegations appears from the complain petition that the complainant has deposited two cheque of Rs. 26150/- separately, one is Rs. For 25,000/- bearing No. 265528 and second cheque for Rs. 1150/- bearing No.-265529 to his account No. C.D.-44 before the central bank of India, Branch Mithanpura on 21-03-2010. For  incashment. Complainant  further visited the central bank of India on 05-04-2010 and acknowledged by the bank that the bank of Andhra has no any office at Muzaffarpur as such the cheque was bounced the bank has stated that the said cheque should be sent to Andhra bank Delhi branch for its clearance, accordingly the cheque has already been send to Delhi for its clearance. The complainant further visited the bank after one week and as per direction again he came at the branch, then he was acknowledged that his cheque is missing and not traceable the complainant when founds, the cheque is missing and not traceable he contacted his friend  at Delhi to verify his cheque from Delhi Andhra Bank Branch. He has further alleged that due to negligent conduct his friend who had issued the cheque under the mind of mistake he stop the payment of said cheque. After that in the May, 2010 both the cheques were

returned back to the complainant. The complainant is petty contractor from he attitude at bank of non-payment of cheque his contract work was not completed and about Rs. 2,00000/-(Two lakh only) were expended in the coming and going to friend of the complainant from Delhi for clearance of said cheque as such complainant has beared much loss his prestige was lowered down and for several  months he was bound to close his office.

In this case notice to the opposite party has been served and accordingly the opposite party has filed his written statement on 29-02-2012 alleging there in that the case is not maintainable in eye of law as well as fact. The opposite party has accepted that the complainant is running saving Account bearing No.-44 in his bank and on the date of filing written statement he has only Rs. 652/- as balance letter on the said number became a new number that is 1943110469. the complainant  is not properly handling  his account only he has kept his account to cash the cheque or draft. Further the opposite party has admitted that the complainant  has submitted two cheque on 23-03-2010 in his bank for payment issued from Andhra Bank bearing cheque No.- 265528  For Rs. 25,000/- and 265529 for Rs. 1150/- only. Accordingly the opposite party has sent the such cheques for clearance to the central bank of India Aamgola Branch, Muzaffarpur on the said date he was not member of clearing house. The opposite party has raised objection against the statement of complainant that he has wrongly claimed that he has deposited the cheque on 21-03-2010 because the said cheque showing issued on 23-03-2010 as such it appears that the complainant is talling alie. Further the opposite party has alleged that on 25-03-2010 the said cheque was returned back  from the central bank of India Aamgola branch, to the Branch of opposite party with mentioning that in Muzaffarpur corporate area  no any branch of Andhra bank is available, which was received in the of bank opposite party through postal service on 30-03-2010 after that on the same day the opposite party has sent the cheque to his own bank N.B.O at Delhi for clearance  and collection through postal service. Due to delay the opposite party has sent reminder on 24-04-2010 for clearance to which the copy has been attached, latter on the central bank of India Delhi N.B.O office returned the said cheque on 20-04-2010 with mentioning that the issuer of cheque has stopped the payment accordingly that cheques were returned back through postal service, which was received on 04-05-2010 accordingly the cheque was returned back to complainant after giving him information. The opposite party has denied all allegations made by the complainant that the cheque was missing which is false and concocted the bank had never done any negligent with his account holder accept that the complainant having ill motive intentionally by creating false and fabricated story to harass the bank, filed this case against the provisions of law and accordingly prayed to dismiss the case.

 

Complainant has filed the Xerox copy  of letter dated 25-03-2010, cheque return memo central bank of India which shows at serial no.-20 that Andhra Bank branch, is not available in Muzaffarpur corporate area, annexure-2 letter on return of cheques due to stop payment by drawer issued from central bank of India Delhi N.B.O Branch, and further he has filed the Xerox copy of his cheque dated 23-03-2010 one for Rs. 25,000/- and second for Rs. 1150/-. On the other hand the opposite party has filed Xerox Copy of letter dated 24-04-2010 issued by Central Bank of India Mithanpura Branch to N.B.O Delhi, reminder  for clearance and further the statement of account of complainant  from which it appears that the account of complainant has its closing balance Rs. 652/- only on 15-02-2012.Either of the parties have not submitting any oral evidence.

Latter on it appear from the brief history of complain petition the complainant has amended his complain on 5-10-2012 and added that the Andhra Bank Muzaffarpur Branch has started his banking business from 14-08-2009 and is a member of clearance house Muzaffarpur corporate area which appears from R.T.I.  Against which the opposite party  has filed his additional written statement mentioning there in that the complain has only alleged that from 31-08-2009 the Andhra Bank is taking part in clearing house at Muzaffarpur but he had not given the information that whether he is authorized member or not as such the complainant has given incomplete information.

We have heard the argument from the both side at length  perused the record with the material submitted by the parties. Admittedly the alleged cheque was dropped for payment to the branch of opposite party, the  date of dispute in submission is immaterial because there is only dispute of two days but the allegation in this regard of complainant became talk because the cheque issue date is 23-03-2010. Now the alleging of complainant  is only that his cheque was not cashed due to harassment attitude of opposite party. The opposite party has explained  his conduct in his written statement as mentioned above the opposite party has sent the cheque for clearance to his head office Delhi because the drawer bank Andhra bank is not member of clearing house at Muzaffarpur but latter on from his head office it has been informed that the drawer has stopped the payment, who is the friend of complainant. Delay was caused in postal service. We do not find in harassing attitude of the opposite party against the complainant has not filed any documentary evidence of money receipt which ever was expended by him or his friend from Delhi to Muzaffarpur. When the clearance was going to made by the head office of the opposite party at Delhi the friend of complainant stopped the payment of said cheque who was drawer of the cheque as such it will be presumed that the stop payment was under the convenience of complainant  to create a case against the opposite party on false and fake grounds regarding the amended fact made by the complainant collect from the R.T.I is only addition to his complaint  brief. He has not filed any supportive document. But in this respect I would like to say that if the Andhra Bank was a member of clearing house at Muzaffarpur then what circumstance arise to stop the payment which has not been submitted by the complainant. Only delay can be taken into consideration regarding this fact we are of the view if the payment was not stopped the complainant only be entitled to raise this fact for this complainant which he has not done.

Considering the facts and circumstances material available with the record it appears to say that the complainant has failed to prove his case and his case is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly the case and the same is dismissed with cost parties bears their own cost.

 

Member                                                       President