This C.C coming on before us for final hearing, on 22-8-2008 in the presence of  Sri. A.Ravindra,Advocate for Complainant,  and  of   Sri.R.VenkataRatnam, Advocate for the opposite party ; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing arguments, and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

ORDER

(Per Smt.V.Vijaya Rekha. Member )

1.         This complaint is filed under section 12(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

2.         The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant had given a hand loan of Rs.10,000/- to one R.V.Sivaram and in turn the said Sivaram issued a cheque in favour of complainant for Rs.10,000/- vide cheque No.195463, dated 18-12-2005 drawn on H.S.B.C.Bank, Hyderabad, and  the complainant is S.B.Account  holder vide Account No.5614 in Vijaya Bank, Kothagudem as such he approached the opposite party on 9-6-2006 and presented the cheque for collection and after presentation of the said cheque the complainant made many enquiries about the realization of the cheque amount, instead of  sending the cheque for collection,  the opposite party  made an intimation on 27-6-2006 to the complainant that the cheque was  not sent for collection and the same is retained with them.  Further the complainant alleges that he lost the opportunity of recovering the cheque amount from R.V.Sivaram, as the validity period of said cheque was lapsed on 18-6-2006 due to negligent attitude of opposite party and the complainant addressed a letter to opposite party on 6-7-2006,seeking the compensation for loss of cheque amount but there is no reply from the opposite party as such the complainant issued a legal notice dated 31-7-2006 and again the opposite party has not responded.  The complainant further stated that he sustained loss due to the negligent attitude of opposite party and also alleges that the attitude of opposite party  amounts to deficiency of service, as such  the complainant approached the Forum for redressal and prayed to direct the opposite party for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards cheque amount together with interest @ 24% P.A. from the date of presentation of cheque for collection till realization and Rs.10,000/- towards damages and costs of Rs.5,000/-.

3.         Along with the complaint the complainant filed some documents which were marked as Exhibits.  Ex A1 is the counter foil of S.B.Account pay– in- slip dated 9-6-2006. Ex A2 is the letter dated 6-7-2006, addressed by the complainant to the opposite party. Ex A3 is the legal notice dated 31-7-2006 Ex A4 is the postal acknowledgement, dated 2-8-2006.

4.         After receipt of notice the opposite party appeared through it’s counsel and filed counter by denying the allegations made in the complaint.

5.         In the counter, the opposite party admitted the presentation of cheque No.195463 dated 18-12-2005 before the opposite party for collection and denied the other allegations of the complainant and the opposite party contended that the complainant presented the cheque at belated stage i.e., just few days before completion of validity period of the cheque and as per bank guidelines and guidelines and rules of Reserve Bank the clearance of cheque of outstation requires 15 days time  before expiry of validity period of cheque and the said cheque was also not sent for collection due to rush of work of Assistant Manager of opposite party, he could not observe the validity period of cheque.  Further the opposite party contended that after completion of validity period of cheque also the complainant did not come to the opposite party for collection of the cheque as such the cheque was remained with the bank and also mentioned that they did not give reply to the letter of the complainant in view of Vijaya Bank Head Office circular as such there is no deficiency on the part of opposite party and prayed to dismiss the complaint.

6.         In support of averments of both the parties, the complainant and the opposite party filed written arguments almost all the same averments as mentioned in the complaint and counter.

7.         In view of above submissions made by  both the parties now the point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to any relief as prayed or not?

8.         As seen from the averments of complaint and counter there is no dispute  regarding the presentation of cheque No.195463, dated 18-12-2005  for collection before the opposite party bank on 9-6-2006 and as per the complaint  after presentation of cheque for collection the complainant enquired the opposite party many times about realization of cheque amount instead of realization of cheque amount, on 27-6-2006 i.e., after completion of validity period of cheque  the opposite party intimated the complaint that the cheque was not sent for collection to the concerned bank and the same is kept with them and the complainant alleged that he lost cheque amount of Rs.10,000/- due to the negligence of opposite party as such the complainant seeks Redressal from the opposite party.  On the other hand the opposite party contended that the complainant  presented the cheque  on 9-6-2006 i.e., only few days before expiry of validity period of the cheque   and also contended that  as per bank Head Office circulars and reserve Bank guide lines every cheque must be presented for collection before 15 days  prior to validity period of the cheque and in support of their contentions the opposite party did not file  any material before the Forum  for consideration, except filing of counter.  In the absence of any proof this Forum cannot come to a conclusion and mere contentions are not sufficient to  come to a conclusion and as per complaint the opposite party intimated the complainant on 27-6-2006 that the cheque was not sent for collection, and the same is with them, it clearly shows that the opposite party made an intimation after expiry of validity period and moreover the opposite party did not clarify why they could not return the cheque to the complainant before validity period of cheque, if the complainant not presented the cheque 15days prior to  it’s validity and it seems only to evade their liability the opposite party mentioned in its counter that the Assistant Manager “ might not have observed the validity period of the cheque” due to rush of work, this contention is not tenable and more over it is the duty of the opposite party to give proper services to their consumers and it is the duty of the opposite party to take appropriate steps to send the cheque for collection to the concerned bank  within it’s validity period  The National Commission categorically stated in this aspect in State Bank of Patiala Vs.Rajender Lal and another, IV(2003) CPJ 53 (NC) – cheque deposited for collection – neither the cheque nor amount received – District Forum held, deficiency in service proved, Opposite Party liable to pay cheque amount with interest – order upheld in appeal – hence revision – cheque dishonored due to insufficiency of funds, lost in transit – legally open for complainant to initiate civil/criminal proceedings – opposite party not liable  to pay cheque amount – opposite party failed to inform  complainant about dishonor of cheque and its loss in transit, cannot escape liability for payment of reasonable compensation – order modified accordingly.

            In the light of above decision and discussion the point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant and the opposite party is liable to pay compensation to the complainant for deficiency of service on the part of them.

9.         In the result, the complaint is allowed in part and the opposite party is directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation to the complainant and also directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- towards costs of litigation within one month from the date of receipt of this order .          

Typed to dictation, Corrected and pronounced by us, in this Forum on this 8th day of September, 2008.                                                                                              

                                                                   President                      Member                 Member

                                                                         District Consumers Forum, Khammam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                                                        WITNESS EXAMINED FOR      

Complainant                                                                                                       Opposite parties                                                                                                                                                                  

      Nil                                                                                                           Nil

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR

Complainant      

Ex A1: counter  foil of S.B.Account pay– in- slip dated 9-6-2006.

Ex A2: letter dated 6-7-2006, addressed by the complainant to the opposite party.

Ex A3 : legal notice dated 31-7-2006

Ex A4 :postal acknowledgement, dated 2-8-2006.

Opposite parties                                                                                                                                                   

      Nil                                                                              

President                 Member           Member

                                                                         District Consumers Forum, Khammam