Delhi

East Delhi

CC/441/2016

ANIL ARYA - Complainant(s)

Versus

DENA BANK - Opp.Party(s)

14 Feb 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 441/16

 

Shri Anil Arya (Proprietor),

For M/s Aarsh International (Sole Proprietorship)

172, 1^st floor, Village Patparganj,

Delhi- 110091

•  

Vs

 

1. Dena Bank (Laxmi Nagar Branch)

Through its Bank Manager,

Mangal Bazar,

Laxmi Nagar,

Delhi- 110092

 

2. Dena Bank (Registered Office)

Throught its Chairman and Managing Director,

Dena Corporation Centre

C-10, G-Bloack,

Bandra-Kurla Complex,

Bandra (E),

Mumbai- 400051

 

….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 24.08.2016

Judgment Reserved on: 14.02.2020

Judgment Passed on: 28.02.2020

CORUM:

Sh. SUKHDEV SINGH                  (PRESIDENT)

Dr. P.N. TIWARI                           (MEMBER)

Ms. HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

ORDER BY: HARPREET KAUR CHARYA (MEMBER)

 

JUDGEMENT

 

Jurisdiciton of this Forum has been invoked by the complainant, Shri Anil Arya, against Dena Bank, (Laxmi Nagar Branch) OP-1 and Dena Bank, (Regd. Office) OP-2 with allegations of deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.

 Facts necessary for the disposal of present complaint are that the Complainant is the sole proprietor of M/s Aarsh International having its registered office at Patparganj. The complainant is maintaining current account bearing no. 095211023992 with Dena Bank, OP-1. The complainant has stated that the goods and services were being used exclusively for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self employment.

In the month of February, 2016, the complainant was approached by one Mr. Ajay for processing the car loan. The cheque bearing no. 451206 was stolen by said Mr. Ajay, which came to the knowledge of the complainant later on. It has been stated that the said cheque was a cross cheque and an “& Co. payee” series, which was signed. However, the name and amount were left blank, when the said cheque was stolen. On 19.02.2016, the stolen cheque was presented with OP for which, cash payment of Rs. 2,85,000/- was made to Mr. Ajay. The complainant has alleged that despite the cheque being a crossed cheque, the OP had wrongfully honored the same by paying cash to the presenter.

It has been further stated though the transaction had taken place on 19.02.2016, OP failed to intimate the complainant through SMS alert, for which the complainant was being regularly charged. A complaint was registered with SHO, PS: Shakarpur Delhi, on 22.02.2016 w.r.t. the fraud played by Mr. Ajay.

The complainant has alleged that the amount of Rs. 2,85,000/- was paid by OP despite the fact that there were several discrepancies in the cheque, which were ignored by the officials of OP. He has stated that the singnatures on the cheque were forged and fraud was played upon which was apparent on the face of it. The said cheque was honored by ignoring the guidelines framed by RBI vide its circular dated 22.02.2010, which stated that in case there was over writing or cutting on a cheque, no payment was to be made. Since, no ID proof of the bearer was taken this also amounted to deficiency in services.

Despite complaint dated 23.02.2016 and several emails, the grievance of the complainant was not resolved. Hence, he registered a complaint with banking ombudsman, where the complainant received the reply that the ombudsman were unable to resolve the issue. Legal notices dated 23.05.2016 and 24.05.2016 was served upon OPs, demanding the refund of Rs. 2,85,000/- with interest @18% per annum.

Feeling aggrieved by the conduct of the OPs, the complainant has prayed for direction to OP to refund Rs. 2,85,000/- alongwith interest @18% per annum from 19.02.2016; compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- on account of mental torture and agony.

CST registration certificate as Annexure- A1, copy of sample cheque as Annexure- A2, copy of statement of account from 18.12.2015 to 22.12.2015 as Annexure- A3 (Colly.), statement of account from 15.02.2016 to 22.02.2016 as Annexure- A4, complaint to SHO, PS: Shakarpur dated 22.02.2016 as Annexure- A5, guidelines dated 22.02.2010 issued by RBI are Annexure- A6 (Colly.), complaint dated 23.02.2016 and various emails to branch manager,  OP-1 and higher officials of OPs is Annexure- A7 and Annexure- A8 (Colly.), reply of OP-1 to the complainant dated 23.02.2016 is Annexure- A9, complaint to the banking ombudsman is Annexure- A10, legal Notice dated 23.05.2016 and 24.05.2016 are Annexure- A11 to Annexure- A13. Reply of banking ombudsman is Annexure- A14.

The complainant has also moved an application under Section 13 (4), the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for the production of original cheque.

Written Statement was filed on behalf of OP upon service of notice, where they have taken several pleas in their defence such as the complaint involved complicated questions of fact and law, which required evidence, cross examination which could not be  decided under the summary proceedings of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; the transaction appeared to be of commercial nature; non joinder of necessary party i.e. Mr. Ajay.

It was submitted the cheque was honored by OP within the framework and guidelines by RBI. The cheque was paid after due verification of all the signatures and cancellation of crossing and SMS alert were sent as per the procedure. Hence, no negligence could be attributed on the part of OPs. Rest of the contents of the complaint have been denied.

They have annexed the copy of the cheque in dispute as                   Annexure OP-1.

Rejoinder was filed on behalf of the complainant, where he has denied the submissions made by OPs and reiterated those of his complaint.

Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant where he has deposed on oath the contents of his complaint and has relied on the annexure. He has got exhibited copy of VAT registration certificate issued in favour of M/s Aarsh International as Ex.CW1/1, copy of the cheque bearing no. 695132 as Ex.CW1/2 alongwith original sample cheque bearing no. 451213 as Ex.CW1/3.

The original bank statement showing the deduction of charges towards SMS alert from December, 2015 to 2017 as Ex.CW1/4 (Colly.), complaint dated 22.02.2016 to SHO, PS: Shakarpur is Ex.CW1/5. Circular issued by RBI is Ex.CW1/6.  Complaint to the branch manager of OP-1, which is of date 23.02.2016 and emails exchanged with senior officials of Dena Bank have been exhibited as Ex.CW1/7 and Ex.CW1/8 respectively, reply from OP-1 is Ex.CW1/110, complaint with banking ombudsman and its reply is Ex.CW1/11 to Ex.CW1/12 and Ex.CW1/16. Application for obtaining the copy of the cheque which is of date 11.04.2016 is Ex.CW1/13. Legal notices dated 23.05.2016 and 24.05.2016 are Ex.CW1/14 and Ex.CW1/15.

OP have got examined Shri Rahul Pandey, Chief Manager of Dena Bank. He has narrated the contents of their Written Statement and has got exhibited the copy of the cheque no. 451206 as Ex.AW1/1.

We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP and have perused the material placed on record. It was argued by Ld. Counsel for OP that complainant was not a consumer under section 2(1)(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as he was maintaining current account, if we go through the pleadings the complainant has stated that he had been maintaining current account with OP being the sole proprietor of M/s Aarsh International, which was for the purpose of self employment. Thus, the case of the complainant is covered under explanation to                  Section 2(1)(d)(ii)  

As far as merits of the complaint are concerned the complainant has stated that the signatures on the alleged cheque had been forged, which has been disputed by OP and have also placed on record the original cheque. It is also the allegation of the complainant that the cheque was stolen from his office, and subsequently his signatures were forged. Since, the entire complaint is based on forgery, it requires trial and cannot be adjudicated in the summary proceedings under this Act.

Hence, the present complaint is dismissed for reasons mentioned above. Complaint stands disposed of accordingly. Original cheque be returned to OP.

Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                    (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)     Member                                                 Member

 

 

(SUKHDEV SINGH)

          President