Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/268/2020

Jyoti Khemka - Complainant(s)

Versus

Canara Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Shreenath A. Khemka

03 Aug 2021

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                    

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/268/2020
Date of Institution	:	13/08/2020
Date of Decision	:	03/08/2021

 

     JYOTI KHEMKA (maidenly known as JYOTI JAIN), aged 47 years, d/o Ram Niwas Jain, r/o House No.1370, Sector 19B, Chandigarh-160019; previously r/o 14/15, Shakti Nagar, Delhi—110007; email:ashok.khemka@gmail.com.

… Complainant

V E R S U S

     CANARA BANK through its Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Shakti Nagar Branch, Nangia Park, Shakti Nagar, Delhi­-110007; email:cb1170@canarabank.com.

… Opposite Party

CORAM :	RAJAN DEWAN	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                

ARGUED BY	:	Sh.Shreenath A.Khemka, Counsel for Complainant.
	:	Sh.Nitin Grover, Counsel for OP.

 

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.      The long and short of the allegations are that complainant is having an account in Canara Bank, Nangia Park, Shakti Nagar, Delhi-110007. Complainant purchased a car, for which the complainant drew Cheque No.911537 dated 27.06.2020 on his Savings bank a/c 1170XXXXXXX26, for INR 6.95 lakhs. It has been averred, on the basis of the creditworthiness of the complainant, the vendor sanctioned the sale on 28.06.2020 (C-2). However, on 30.06.2020, the complainant was informed by the vendor that her Cheque had been dishonored, and the sale was consequently cancelled. On 09.07.2020 and 10.07.2020, the complainant accordingly served notices through Registered Post and email upon the OP Bank asking the reason for the dishonor of the Cheque. In response thereto, vide email dated 17.07.2020, the Opposite Party bank informed that the Cheque was dishonored due to mismatch of her signatures. Hence, this complaint.
2.     OP contested the consumer complaint and filed its written reply. Opposite Party has been pleaded that the signature of the complainant  differ from the actual signature available in the records of the bank. Pleading that no cause of action accrued at any point time for the complainant to file the present complaint, a prayer has been made for dismissal of the present complaint.
3.     Parties led evidence by way of affidavits and documents.
4.     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. After perusal of record, our findings are as under:-
5.     The main grievance of the complainant is that cheque for Rs.6.95 lakhs issued by her was dishonored by the Opposite Party in spite of having adequate funds in excess of 4-times of the cheque amount, in her Savings bank accounts.
6.     The only stand taken by the Opposite Party is that the complainant has failed to show or prove any deficiency in service or unfair practice on his part as the signature of the complainant apparently differ from the actual signature available in the records of the bank and for this reason the cheque was returned unpaid. To substantiate his claim, the Opposite Party has not  adduced/produced any documentary evidence by way of any examining certificate/report from any authorities hand writing expert that the signature of the complaint on the cheque and the one in the records differ materially. Moreover, the said cheque along with the cheque book was issued by the Opposite Party himself and there was no complaint received or pending with the Opposite Party bank about any loss of the cheque. Hence, we are of the concerted opinion that by not honoring of cheque, Opposite Party has indulged in the unfair trade practice and there has been deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party and has caused mental agony & harassment to complainant, by causing the loss of reputation.
7.     In view of the above discussion, the present consumer complaint succeeds and the same is accordingly partly allowed. OP is directed as under :-

1. to pay an amount of ₹5000/-to the complainant as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment & causing loss of reputation.
2. to pay ₹5000/- to the complainant as costs of litigation.

8.     This order be complied with by the OP within thirty days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall make the payment of the amount mentioned at Sr.No.(i)  above, with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of this order, till realization, apart from compliance of direction at Sr.No.(ii) above.
9.     Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

	Sd/-	Sd/-	Sd/-
03/08/2021	[Suresh Kumar Sardana]	[Surjeet Kaur]	[Rajan Dewan]
Ls	Member	Member	President