No. 6/22.09.2010

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.

Appellant through Mr. Debnarayan Roy, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent No. 2 through Mr. Bimal Kr. Mondal, the authorized representative are present.  None appears on behalf of Respondent No. 1.  Proforma Respondent No. 2 appears today at the hearing of this appeal.  It may be noted that no relief has been prayed for against this Proforma Respondent No. 2 in this appeal.

This appeal is by the Complainant against the judgement and order of dismissal of his complaint case being No. CC/09/51.

Rose Valley Real Estate & Construction Ltd. issued two cheques in favour of the Complainant on 14.04.2009 respectively for Rs.30,219/- and Rs.18,895/-.  It is not in dispute that the Complainant maintains a SB A/c with the United Bank of India, Bethuadahari Branch in the District of Nadia. The aforesaid cheques were depsited with the United Bank of India, Ranaghat Branch on 20.04.2009 for encashment in the SB A/c of the Complainant.  It has been alleged by the Complainant that the said two cheques were returned to him without encashment by not disclosing any reason therefor.  Although the Respondent – Bank has denied such allegation of the Complainant, but in course of hearing of the complaint case it has been admitted that at the relevant time Core Banking Services since had just been initiated at his Branch and not fully implemented, so the said cheques were returned to him without encashment.  Be that as it may, the said cheques were further tendered for encashment with the United Bank of India, Bethuadahari Branch where the Complainant has his SB A/c and were accordingly encashed on 05.06.2009.

The complaint case has been dismissed on contest with the observation that since there was no malafide intention on the part of the Respondent – Bank in not eacashing the said cheques which were deposited at the Ranaghat Branch so the Complainant is not entitled to any compensation whatsoever.

It is not in dispute that as per Banking Rules and Regulation under the Core Banking system wherever a cheque is deposited with any branch of a particular Bank with which the customer has an account such cheque should be encashed irrespective of the fact that the same has not been deposited with the particular branch in which the customer has his account.  In the case in hand the Complainant maintains a SB A/c with the United Bank of India, Bethuadahari Branch.  Accordingly the cheques which were deposited with the United Bank of India, Ranaghat Branch ought to have been encashed as per the Core Banking Services that was implemented by that time in the United Bank of India. 

It is, therefore, evident that because of non-encashment of the said cheques of the Complainant there was deficiency of service by the Respondent No. 1.  In the process he has suffered Savings Bank rate of interest on the aforesaid amount which it would have earned for the period from the date of refusal of encashment to the date on which the said cheques were ultimately encashed.  We, therefore, set aside the impugned order of dismissal of complaint case.  The appeal is accordingly disposed of by directing the Respondent No. 1 to credit a Savings Bank rate of interest on the aforesaid amount of Rs.30,219/- and Rs.18,895/- for the period from 28.04.2009 till 05.06.2009 within a period of 45 days from the date of the order.   The appeal is thus disposed of.