IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC -65/2014 .
Date of Filing: 05.06.2014. Date of Final Order: 29.04.2015.
Complainant: Anjuman Hemalyetul Islam Granthsiaya, Vill. Kankuriamore, P.O. Kankuria,
Dist. Murshidabad Rep. by Md. Mojammel Hossain, Vill&P.O. Joy Krishnapur,
Dist. Murshidabad.
2. Md. Rafikul Islam, New Shikdarpur, P.O. Chaksapur, Dist. Murshidabad.
3. Md. Jajir Hossain, Vill. Jot Kashi, P.O. Kankuria, Dist. Murshidabad.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Vill.& P.O. Kankuria, Via Dhulian, Dist. Murshidabad.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya ………………….President.
Sri Samaresh Kumar Mitra ……………………..Member.
Smt. Pranati Ali ……….……………….……………. Member
FINAL ORDER
Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya—Presiding Member.
The instant complainant has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986 praying for payment of Rs.10, 000/- for non-encashment of cheque and compensation of Rs.10,000/-.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the complainant deposited a Government Cheque bearing No. 119124 dated 19.07.2011 for a sum of Rs.10, 000/- with the bank of OP on 27.07.2011. But the cheque was not encashed. In reply to the objection for non-encashment of the said cheque, the Op Bank stated that they were trying their best to encash the same and lastly they requested the District Library Officer on 05.07.2012 to issue a fresh cheque as the said cheque was lost in transit. The complainant has not yet got the amount of the cheque. It is a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the OP Bank. Having no relief the complainant has filed this case for payment of the said cheque amount of Rs.10, 000/- and for compensation of Rs.10, 000/-. Hence, this complaint case.
Written Version filed by the OP bank, in brief, is that the impugned cheque deposited by the complainant was lost in transit inadvertently. OP Bank lodged complaint with the Police Station on 27.08.12 relating to the loss of the said cheque. The OP Bank also requested the District Library Officer, Murshidabad on 21.05.2012, 05.07.2012 and 03.10.2012 to cancel the said cheque and to issue a fresh cheque in favour of the complainant but in vain. There are no laches on the part of the OP Bank for non-payment of the said cheque and for that the case is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the instant written Version.
Considering pleadings of both parties, the following points have been framed for disposal of the case.
- Whether the case is maintainable in its present form in law and fact?
- Whether complaint is bad for non-joinder and/or mis-joinder of parties?
- Whether there is any cause of action to file the present complaint?
- Whether the case is barred by law of limitation, estoppels, waiver and acquiescence?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the Forum may award in favour of the complainant?
Decision with reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 3.
All these points are taken up taken up together for discussion for the sake of our convenience.
During hearing of argument the Ld. Lawyer for the OP has not raised any objection against these points.
Considering the material on record we do not find anything adverse against these points and as such we find all these points be disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Point No.4.
Regarding the point whether the case is barred by law of limitation, it appears that the cheque was deposited on 19.07.11 and the OP wrote letter to the District Library Officer , Murshidabad on 21.05.12 and 05.07.12 intimating that the cheque was lost in transit and requested the District Library officer for issuance of a fresh cheque where the OP Bank has admitted that the said cheque was not re-issued by the District Library Officer and for the above correspondences by the OP Bank and lastly on 5.07.12 , the question of claim of the OP is barred by law of limitation cannot be raised as the case was filed on 05.06.14 within two years from the date of last letter written by the Bank i.e. 5.6.12.
Considering the above discussion, we can safely conclude that the case is not barred by law of limitation.
So, this point is also disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Point Nos. 5 & 6.
All those two points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
This is a case for non-payment of the amount of cheque Rs.10, 000/- submitted by the complainant with the OP Bank.
The complainant deposited a Government Cheque bearing No. 119124 dated 19.07.2011 for a sum of Rs.10, 000/- with the bank of OP on 27.07.2011. But the cheque was not encashed. In reply to the objection for non-encashment of the said cheque, the Op Bank stated that they were trying their best to encash the same and lastly they requested the District Library Officer on 05.07.2012 to issue a fresh cheque as the said cheque was lost in transit. The complainant has not yet got the amount of the cheque.
The OP’s case is that the impugned cheque deposited by the complainant was lost in transit inadvertently. OP Bank lodged complaint with the Police Station on 27.08.12 relating to the loss of the said cheque. The OP Bank also requested the District Library Officer, Murshidabad on 21.05.2012, 05.07.2012 and 03.10.2012 to cancel the said cheque and to issue a fresh cheque in favour of the complainant but in vain.
From the materials on record , it appears that the complainant is a Book Seller who received a Government Cheque from the District Library for Rs.10,000/- and the said cheque was deposited with the OP Bank and the same was admittedly lost in transit by the OP Bank. It further appears from the material on record that the OP Bank wrote the District Library Officer on 21.05.2012 and lastly on 5.7.12 for cancellation of the impugned cheque being lost in transit by the OP Bank. The liability of the OP Bank is to repay the amount of the impugned cheque along with interest lost by the complainant for such non-encashment as compensation.
This is a case for non-payment of a cheque amounting to Rs.10, 000/- which was deposited by the complainant with the OP Bank. The cheque was lost in transit from the custody of the OP Bank. So, the complainant has no responsibility to collect a fresh cheque from the District Library Officer. Furthermore, the impugned cheque was deposited on 27.7.11 and after such a long period the question of payment of cheque as compensation will obviously arise, even a fresh cheque is issued.
In this case the Ld. Lawyer for the complainant has referred to a decision reported in 1999 WBLR (CPNC) 55 Loading International Vs. Hindustan Copper Ltd.& Anr. where goods were lost in transit and it has been held that carrier is liable to compensate and Insurance Company paid compensation to the owner and is entitled to recover from the carrier.
In the reported decision in AIR 1987(SC) 1603 Canara Bank Vs. Canara Saler Corporation & Ors. it has been held that when the cheque duly signed by a customer is presented before a Bank with whom he has an account , there is an mandate on the Bank to pay the amount covered by the cheque.
It has also been observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court that considering the special nature of the relationship between a Bank and a customer that there is an element of trust between the Bank and its customer, the Bank’s business depends upon the trust”.
In another reported decision 2001 CPJ (144)(SC)(Ker) the Branch Manager South Malabar Gramin Bank Vs. C.I. Rasheed where it has been held that the appellant /OP Bank has not discharged their duty properly , whereas it was negligent towards the grievance of the complainants which amount to clear deficiency of service”
Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the reported decisions cited above, we are of view that all these points are disposed of in favour of the complainant and the Complainant is entitled to get Rs.10,000/- , the cheque amount from the OP Bank.
Regarding the compensation, we find that admittedly the cheque in question was lost in transit by the OP bank and this is nothing but deficiency in service on the part of the Op bank and the cheque in question was deposit on 19.07.11 and since then the cheque has not been encahsed and for that obviously the complainant has suffered loss of interest for that period since 19.07.2011.
The question being encashment of cheque , it is clear that the Op bank will take at least 7 days for encashment and for that claim of interest will arise from 26th July, 2011 and making it round off, we are of opinion that interest be paid since 01.08.2011 till realization of the cheque amount @ 9% p.a. as compensation.
These two points are also disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Considering the above discussion, as a whole, we find that all these points are disposed of in favour of the complainant and as such the complainant is entitled to get the cheque amount for Rs.10,000/- with interest @ 9% p.a since 01.08.2011 till realization.
Hence,
ORDERED
that the Consumer Complaint No. 65/2014 be and the same is allowed on merit in favour of the complainant. The complainant will get Rs.10,000/- plus interest @ 9% p.a. since 01.08.2011 till realization as compensation.
The OP is directed to pay the complainant Rs.10,000/ plus interest on the said amount @9% p.a. since 01.08.2011 till realization as compensation within one month from the date of this order.
In default, the OP has to pay Rs.50/- per day’s delay as fine and the amount so accumulated shall be deposited in the “Consumer Legal Aid Account”.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
