Haryana

Ambala

CC/323/2010

MOHINDER SINGH PROP.OF M/S GAGAN COAL COMPANY - Complainant(s)

Versus

H.D.F.C BANK LTD - Opp.Party(s)

RAVINDER GOEL

29 Jan 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

            Complaint  Case No.: 323 of 2006/2010

Date of Institution: 14.08.06/08.06.2010

            Date of Decision:   29.01.2016

Mohinder Singh, Prop. M/s Gagan Goal Company, UGF-24, Ist Floor, Amba Commercial Complex, Staff Road, Ambala Cantt.                                                                                                                                                                                                      ……Complainant.

Versus

H.D.FC. Bank  Ltd., Nichelson Road, Ambala Cantt through its Branch Manager.

                                                                                                ……Opposite Party

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act

 

CORAM:        SH.A.K. SARDANA, PRESIDENT.

                        SH. PUSHPENDER KUMAR, MEMBER.

Present:          Sh. Ravinder Goel, Adv. counsel for complainant.

                        Sh. Ashok Goel,  Adv. counsel for Op.

ORDER.

 

                        Present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the complainant alleging therein that the complainant is carrying out his business of Coal under the name & style of M/s Gagan Coal Company at Ambala Cantt having its account in HDFC Bank  bearing account no.131232001289. On 08.02.2006, someone misused the cheque bearing No.236751 dated 08.02.2006 and had withdrawn an amount of Rs.1.00 lac by forging signatures of the complainant and the OP has not verified the signatures of the complainant and without recognizing/tallying the signatures of the complainant, disbursed the amount of Rs.1.00 lac whereas  the signatures of the complainant were  differentiate with the signatures made on the cheque.  It has been further contended that one of the employee of  OP-Bank also written on the back of the cheque in question that the amount is being withdrawn for ‘Business purpose’.  The complainant submitted that in the month of June 2005, he intimated regarding misplacement of the said cheque  but the bank did not take any action in the matter rather released the amount against the said cheque without tallying his signatures.  Complainant also written letters dated 10.02.2006 & 10.03.2006 to the Op Bank to verify  the facts but they did not bother. However, the Branch Manager of OP Bank assured the complainant to compensate the loss and confessed the guilt on the part of his employee but the OP did not compensate the loss of Rs.1.00 lac to the complainant.  Thereafter, the complainant made a complaint in writing to the Banking Ombudsman but of no avail. Thus the complainant has prayed that OP has harassed & caused mental agony  to him by disbursing his amount of Rs.1.00 lac to some other person by not tallying signatures on the cheque with his specimen signatures.  Hence, the present complaint seeking relief as per prayer clause has been preferred before this Forum.

2.                     Upon notice, Op-Bank appeared through counsel and  submitted reply raising preliminary objections with the averments that complaint is not maintainable in the present form being false, frivolous  & vexatious one.  On merits, it has been urged that complainant used to operate his account under his signature either himself or through his own person and the OP as per the instructions of the complainant used to entertain the bank transactions of the complainant at the earliest possible  minimum time. It has also been submitted that  the cheque in question was issued by the complainant for Rs.1.00 lac as a bearer cheque and the OP Bank in due course of its business taking due prudence in clearing the cheque after comparing the signature on the cheque as per the banking norms, rules & regulations cleared the cheque in question and made its payment  to the person who was sent  by the complainant  with the cheque in question on good faith and the person on inquiry told that the amount was being withdrawn  for the  ‘business purpose’ and this endorsement was also made on the  cheque by the employee  of the OP Bank.   It has been denied that the complainant ever intimated the OP Bank regarding misplacement of cheque in question in writing so that the bank could have noted the same in the record of the bank as well  as in the account of complainant about the loss of cheque.  However, it has been admitted that OP-Bank received letters from complainant dated 10.02.2006 & 10.03.2006 but in letter dated 10.02.2006, there is no mentioning of loss of cheque whereas the OP bank  replied the same vide their letter dated 11.2.2006 and thereafter the letter dated 10.03.2006 received by the OP-Bank  on 27.03.2006 mentioning about the loss of cheque book  but the intimation about the same was never given to the OP  Bank till date from  June 2005 and the complaint  made by complainant in this regard has also been rejected by higher authorities after due verification.  In the end, it has been submitted that payment was made after  comparing the signature on cheque  with the specimen signatures available in the bank and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

3.                     To prove his version, the complainant tendered his affidavit Annexure CX alongwith documents as Annexures C-1 to C-7 and closed the evidence whereas  on the other hand, counsel for Ops tendered affidavit of Sh. B.L.Indoria, Manager  as Annexure RX alongwith documents as Annexures R-1  to R-6 and closed  the evidence on  behalf of OP.

4.                     We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on file. The main contention of the complainant is that  someone by misusing cheque bearing No.236751 dated 08.02.2006 withdrawn an amount of Rs.1.00 lac from his abovesaid account and thus the complainant has grievance against the OP Bank that the Bank without tallying his signatures with the specimen signatures lying in the banks record paid the amount of Rs.1.00 lac to some unknown person. To prove his case, complainant has placed on record documents i.e. statement of account (Annexure C-1), letter dated 10.02.2006 & 10.03.2006 written by complainant firm to OP Bank (Annexure C-2 & C-3), letter dated 10.03.2006 written by complainant to the Ombudsman Banking, Chandigarh (Annexure C-4) and photocopy of cheque  (Annexure C-5). 

                        On the other hand, contention of OP Bank is that  they have disbursed the amount of Rs.1.00 lac to the person who was having the bearer cheque  of complainant firm after tallying signatures on the cheque with specimen signatures of complainant. To substantiate his case, the OP has placed on record  letter dated 11.02.2006 written by bank to the complainant Firm (Annexure R-2) and copy of cheque in question having signatures of the person who received the amount alongwith endorsement thereupon (Annexure R-6).

 5.                    Perusal of letter dated 10.02.2006 (Annexure C-2) reveals that there is no any mentioning regarding loss of the alleged cheque or cheque book as alleged in the complaint rather the OP Bank has replied vide letter dated 11.02.2006 (Annexure R-2) to the  complainant firm  that “in this connection, we would like to inform you that one of the conditions for issue and use of cheque book is that the customers are required to keep the cheque book in a safe place whenever it is not in use and to notify the Bank immediately in case any cheque is lost or stolen. Kindly note that in respect of the aforesaid cheque, we have neither received any intimation from you  regarding  the loss/theft thereof nor any instructions for stop payment of the same”.  Thereafter, the complainant submitted another letter dated 10.03.2006 to the OP Bank wherein  it has been written that  “in the month of June 2005, complainant was present in the OP Bank for routine transactions where he told one of the staff members of OP Bank that 8 cheque books provided by you was missing” but  surprisingly, no any name of the staff member has been mentioned by the complainant to whom he intimated  and  thus the version of complainant is not believable. Further perusal of Annexure R-6 (photocopy of cheque in question) reveals that  one Ravi Sahni has received the payment  of Rs.1.00 lac for ‘Business Purpose’   

6.                     After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the documents placed on record, we are of the confirmed view that complainant himself is at negligence and wrongly alleging the OP Bank for his own wrong doings.  The complainant has not mentioned in his letter dated 10.02.2006 that the alleged cheque has been misplaced by him in the month of June 2005 rather in the letter dated 10.03.2006, he is mentioning this fact only to controvert the reply of Bank  dated 11.02.2006 (Annexure R-2) which is after thought. But very surprising to us, the complainant is a businessman and he must have knowledge that once a cheque has been misplaced, the same is required to be notified in writing to the concerned bank but the complainant has done nothing of such sort. Further as per document (Annexure R-6) which is  ‘self/bearer cheque’  means that the payment is to be given to the person who is having the same and thus the bank after due diligence & care has rightly disbursed the amount  to one Ravi Sahni,  bearer of the cheque by getting his signatures on the reverse of the cheque. Apart from it, we have perused the order dated 10.12.2009 passed by the Forum in due proceedings of the case whereby the application moved by the complainant for examination of Handwriting Expert  Shri Kranti Kumar Sharma, Chandigarh to take photographs of the disputed signatures on the cheque in question  has been disposed of by the Forum with the observation that “We have perused  the original cheque in question and compared the signatures on it with the signatures of the complainant and his affidavit.  The signature appears to be the same with naked eye.  The time of the Forum is being wasted in unnecessary application for the last 1 ½  years. Moreover, the original cheque has been produced on the file many times but it appears, the complainant is wasting the time unnecessarily. Today also neither complainant nor his counsel is present. In this eventuality, the application moved by the complainant is hereby dismissed.  Now to come up on 20.01.2010 for CWs and it will be last opportunity”. So, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the complainant has miserably failed to prove his case and  thus we have no option except to dismiss the present complaint. Hence, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

ANNOUNCED:29.01.2016                                                        Sd/-

                                                                                           (A.K. SARDANA)

                      PRESIDENT                

 

 

                                                                                                 Sd/-

(PUSHPENDER KUMAR)

                                                                                       MEMBER