| Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CACHAR :: SILCHAR Con. Case No. 62 of 2014 Sri Pranoy Kumar Nath, …………………………………………………. Complainant. -V/S- 1. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India Narsingpur Branch, ADB – 1803, P.O – Narsingpur, Dist – Cachar, Assam. 2. The Branch Manager, Axis Bank Ltd., Silchar Branch Shillongpatty, P.O – Silchar, Dist – Cachar, Assam………………………..……………………….Opp. Party Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Mrs. Chandana Purkayastha, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Appeared :- Sri Pijush Kanti Das, Advocate for the complainant. Sri , Sibdas Dutta, Advocate for the O.P. No. 1. None for O.P. No. 2 Date of evidence………………………………. 11-05-2015, 22-09-2016 Date of oral argument…………….................. 02-05-2017 Date of judgment……………………………... 01-06-2017 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (Sri Bishnu Debnath) - This Case has been brought U/S 12 of the C.P Act for receiving Draft amount of Rs.7650/- with compensation and interest.
- The Complainant Sri. Pronoy Kumar Nath obtained a Draft of Axis Bank, Silchar Branch (O.P. No.2) vide Draft No. 019943 dated 27/02/2013. The said Draft presented to SBI, Narshingtola Branch (O.P NO. 1) to his SB Account No. 118488321138 on 02/03/2013. But the said draft lost in transit while it was in custody of O.P NO. 1. Accordingly, the complainant requested the O.P No. 1 to make arrangement for payment. They failed to credit the draft amount to the SB account of the complainant on the plea that the O.P No. 2 did not issue duplicate Draft by making stop payment of the amount of earlier mention draft.
- Hence, the complainant on advice of the O.P No. 1, requested the O.P NO. 2 but in vain. Hence, the complainant issued pleader’s notice on 14/09/2013 but the O.P. No.1 and O.P No. 2 did not make arrangement for payment in favour of the complainant. Hence, the complainant brought the instant complaint.
- Notice issued, the O.P. No. 2 did not respond but O.P No. 1 in the W/S stated inter alia that letter written to the O.P No. 2 with request to stop payment of Draft No. 019943 and issue duplicate Draft in favour of the Complainant but the O.P No.2 did not honour the request, for which the amount could not be credited to the account of the complainant.
- During hearing, the complainant deposed on oath and Exhibited 5 (Five) documents including deposit slip of Draft and pleader’s notice. The O.P No. 1 also examined Sri. Pradyut Kumar Das, the Branch Manager SBI, Narshingtola Branch and exhibited the letter of request for duplicate Draft vide Ext. A and letter to the employer of the complainant for duplicate cheque for the above amount Ext. B.
- We have perused the evidence on record and heard argument of the Ld. Advocate of the Complainant and the Ld. Advocate of the O.P No.1.
- It is admitted fact that the complainant deposited the draft to the Bank of O.P No. 1 in his SB account No. 118488321138 for crediting the Draft amount of Rs.7,650. But the amount was not credited because the draft has been lost by the O.P No.1 during transit. It is also clear from the evidence on record that no duplicate draft or cheque issued in favour of the complainant for said amount to credit to his account. So, the fact itself is the disservice on the part of the O.P No. 1. However, the O.P No.1 took plea that a letter of request vide Ext. A wrote to the O.P No. 2 for issuing a duplicate draft in favour of the complainant by making arrangement of stop payment of lost draft, Ext. A is the said official correspondence. The O.P No. 2 is absent in the proceeding. For which we are not in a position to know what is the reply of the O.P No. 2. But from the evidence on record it is clear that O.P No. 1 made attempt to collect duplicate Draft but failed due to inaction of the O.P. No. 2.
- Hence, at the stage it is pertinent to mention that when a draft is purchase from the Bank, the amount mentioned in the Draft with commission is required to pay in favour of the issuing Bank. However, it is very easy to the issuing bank to issue a duplicate Draft after making arrangement for stop payment of the amount mentioned in the lost draft. But in no case the Complainant can be requested or compel to present a duplicate Draft. In the instant case, in view of evidence on record it is concluded that the O.P. 2 did not discharge its duty properly because of inaction for issuing duplicate Draft by making stop payment. Hence, the O.P No.2 is also liable for disservice.
- Therefore, the O.P. No. 1 is asked to make payment of draft amount of Rs.7650/-(Rupees Seven six hundred fifty)only in favour of the complainant and thereafter, may at liberty to realize the Draft amount from the O.P No.2 without institution of a separate case but filing a petition for realization in this District Forum. So far as disservice for non-payment of Draft amount in favour of the Complainant in time both O.P No.1 and O.P No.2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.9,000/-(Rupees Nine thousand) only and proceeding cost of Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One thousand) only. So, the O.Ps are asked to make payment of the aforesaid awarded amount to the complainant within 45 days from today. In default, interest at rate of 10% per annum to be fetch to the awarded amount till realization of the full amount.
- With the above, this case is disposed of accordingly on contest. Supply free certified copy to the parties of this litigation.
Given under the hand of the President and Members of this District Forum and seal of the Office of the District Forum on this the 1st day of June, 2017. | |
