Date of filing :-18/06/2013.

Date of Order:-07/10/2015.

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Complaint No. 27 of 2013

Akash Enterprises, through proprietor Smt. Purnima Agrawal W/o Ramniwas Agrawal, R/o Bargarh, Shakti Nagar, W. No. 11(eleven), P.o/Ps/Dist. Bargarh represented through power of attorney holder Akash Kumar Agrawal, S/o Ramniwas Agrawal, R/o. Bargarh, Shakti Nagar, W.No.11, Bargarh, Po/Ps/Tah./Dist. Bargarh.

                                                                                                                                                                                 ..... ..... ..... Complainant.

                                                                               -V e r s u s -

1. Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Bargarh Branch, Po/Dist. Bargarh-768028.

2. Branch Manager, India Overseas Bank, Main Branch, Choudhury Bazar, Cuttack, Po/Dist. Cuttack. ..... ..... ..... Opposite Parties.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant:- Sri Bahadur Behera, Advocate.

For the Opposite Parties :- Sri S.K. Sarangi, Advocate with other Advocates.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Mrs Anjali Behera ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... Member (w), I/C President.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Dt. 07/10/2015. -: J U D G E M E N T :-

Presented by Smt. A.Behera, Member(w), I/C President .

Facts of Complaint :-

Complainant is an account holder/customer of the Bank /Opposite Parties using their services for their various banking services including multicity cheque services to operate their business under the process for purchase of medicines amounting to Rs.1,10,530/-(Rupees one lakh ten thousand five hundred thirty)only from Macleods Pharmaceutical, Cuttack. Complainant had issued multicity cheque No. 269641 on Dt.08/10/2011 at Indian Overseas Bank which the said pharmaceutical company deposited before the Axis Bank, Cuttack having their account there which sent the cheque to Indian Overseas Bank, Main Branch, Choudhary Bazar Cuttack Branch for clearance. But the cheque was not cleared and paid rather returned to Macleod Pharmaceuticals marking that the cheque has been written in different bank no enquery has been made from the Complainant about insurance of any such cheque has been made.

For non clearance of this cheque on their affected the businesses and image of the Complainant before their business associates. Hence alleges deficiency of service against the Opposite Parties and prays for Rs.400/-(Rupees four hundred )only cost of Banking charges towards clearing the cheque, litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only and Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only as compensation for all harassment and mental agony suffered in the process.

Passing the initial scrutinization process being admitted for adjudication Opposite Parties issued notice to show cause about the alleged deficiency of services against taken by its Complainant.

Complainant files following documents and relies on there to substantiates their cause.

1. Copy of cheque Dt.08/10/2011 amounting Rs.1,10,530/-(Rupees one lakh ten thousand five hundred thirty)only.

2. Returns Memorandum of Axis Bank marked as written in different ball pen present at Bargarh Branch for payment.

3. Pleader Notice sent to Opposite Parties.

4. Registration receipt.

Opposite Party No.1(one) appeared on Dt.19/11/2013 and filed their version denying all the changes on Dt.16/07/2014.

Opposite Party No.2(two) filed their vakalatnama and appeared on 9^th Dec 2013 and filed their version on Dt.16/07/2014 denying the charges levelled against them.

Opposite Parties filed the following documents and rely an them to substantiate their case.

1. Xerox copy of Renewal of OCC limit Dt.25/05/2011.

2. Xerox copy of Credit sanction advice Dt.25/05/2011.

3. Regional office endorsement No. RO/ICD/197/498/2010-11 dT.28/03/2011.

4. Annexure of sanction letter (F 568) Dt.28/09/2012.

5. Credit sanction Advice Dt.28/09/2012.

6. Copy of letter Dt.27/11/2012 recovery of interest.

7. Calculation sheet of interest from Dt.11/03/2011 to 27/09/2012.

8. Scanned copy of order passed by Banking ombudsmen.

Hearing was done on Dt.05/05/2015 with presence of the parties who in great details submitted their parts referring documents filed and relied by them.

Heard the matter, perused the petition, documents filed with the case record and Forum finds the following issues to be decided in the matter.

1. Whether by returning the cheque the Opposite Parties have committed deficiency of services ?

2. If yes, what compensation the Complainant is entitled to if any ?

Findings on Issue No.1(one).

From the documents xerox copy of the cheque the Bankers, Consumer relations between the parties established. The facts of issue of cheque, presentation returns of the cheque are admitted by the parties.

Sometimes on practice cheque are returned after scrutinization from the bank where they are presented and that certainly is for added security but if it is done unnecessarily that will place the user of services in problem situation.

In this case the reason for returns is marked as “written in different Ball pen - present at Bargarh Branch”. from which it can be assumed that this is not a serious reason which could not be handled instantly on the same day an this electronic days. The Bank could have enquired about same via email and get an email confirmation from the issuing persons. But as the cheque was presented a different Bank than the issuing Bank they just returned the cheque with out further been involved in the matter. The issuing Bank that is Indian Overseas Bank also did not took any step to clear the problem and further why the returns memo of Axis Bank is advised the cheque to be presented at Bargarh Branch is unknown, again whether that meant presentation of the cheque to be at Axis Branch. Bargarh, on Bargarh is under terminable.

But customer/consumer lost valuable time in the process is invariably founded and that certainly would have an affect.

Further the original cheques not filed before the Forum to ascertain the different ink. Writing as per the cheque return memo document by the Opposite Party and from the xerox copy filed when examined shows difference in the darkness of the Ist line and other portions. The Macleod Pharmaceutical Cuttack is Darken than the other written portions, so also there is slight difference in the wittings also is visible under the circumstances Bank could have doubted the cheque is understandable but no one tried to confirm the matter from the Complainant and tried to get an documents of confirmation about about issuance of the cheque in issue so the cheque can be cleared in time saving the Complainant from problems which is also a part of their services when this kind of problem occurs.

What so ever the reasons Forum finds that due response has not been rendered by the Opposite Parties to the problem of the Complainant so that can be sorted out quicker and for which Complainant suffered is also evident from analysis.

Further the cheque was a multicity cheque with validity numbers duely written the name of receiver, amount with in rupees and words and duely signed and dated, so returning the same for petty reasons is also not reasonable, on the hearing Opposite Parties submitted that doubting fraud they took the step is also only acceptable as they have not initiated any process in case of doubt of fraved appears.

So forum finds them guilty of deficiency of service not rendering smooth services, not solving problems associated in course of business.

Finding on Issue No.2(two).

Complainant prays for Rs.400/-(Rupees four hundred)only charges but no document filed to show this charges.

Also prays Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only as compensation but not able to prove an what allow account such premiary issue occurred and prays for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand )only litigation cost.

Under the circumstances the Opposite Parties are directed to pay Rs. 5000/-(Rupees five thousand )only for all harassment discomfort accrued to the Complainant and this includes by litigation expenses, paid within are month of this order filing which 12%(Twelve percent) interest lies to the award amount till final payment is made.

Complaint allowed and disposed off accordingly.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

                                                                                       I agree,

     (Smt.Anjali Behera)                                    ( Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash )

        M e m b e r(w),                                                     M e m b e r,