In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 166 / 2010.
1) Sri Kailash Nath Agarwal,
8A, Alipore Road, Kolkata-700027. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) HDFC Bank Ltd.,
New Alipore, Kolkata-700027.
2) The Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd.,
New Alipore Branch, Kolkata-700027. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 20 Dated 18/05/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Sri Kailash Nath Agarwal against the o.ps. HDFC Bank Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant hired banking service from o.ps. and opened a SB A/C noi.00401000063965 with o.p. no.1 and complainant has avert that he is a consumer within the C.P. Act. Further case of the complainant is that he issued a cheque bearing no.417092 on 8.12.09 in favour of Madhur Agarwal for Rs.45,000/- drawn on o.p. no.1 and the said cheque was returned for insufficient of fund which came to the knowledge of complainant when the cheque along with return memo dt.10.12.09 was handed over to complainant by the said Madhur Agarwal on 12.12.09. Complainant enquired about his balance by writing letter dt.5.12.09 and it was confirmed to complainant by o.p. no.1 that on that date complainant had balance amount of Rs.48,570.29 with o.p. no.1 bank. Further case of the complainant is that he never received notice about ‘hold on’ of fund of his SB A/C with o.p. no.1 bank.
It is the specific case of the complainant that complainant had sufficient amount for maintaining the cheque dt.8.12.09 for Rs.45,000/- in his SB A/C with o.p. no.1 and for the reason best known to o.p. no.1 that the said cheque was dishonoured. Hence the case lodged by complainant with the prayer contained in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that they have no lapse on their part and they should not be penalized.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is an admitted fact that complainant had a SB A/C with o.ps’ bank referred to above and complainant issued a cheque of Rs.45,000/- on 8.12.09 bearing no.417092 and the same was returned on being dishonoured to complainant on 10.12.09. We have gone through the materials on record and we do not find any receipt to the effect that complainant received notice issued by o.ps. dt.3.12.09. That apart, from the statement of account we find that complainant had sufficient fund in his said account on the date of presentation of the cheque in question. We find clear negligency and deficiency on the part of o.ps. being a service provider to its consumer / complainant as annex-D attached with the petition of complaint reflects that uptill 14.12.09 complainant. had closing balance amount of Rs.48184.24 and thereafter the amount was hold on. So, complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are hereby directed to credit Rs.48184.24 (Rupees forty eight thousand one hundred eighty four and twenty four paise) only in SB A/C of complainant together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of ‘hold on’ till the date of credit and o.ps. are directed to pay to complainant compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousant) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.8000/- (Rupees eight thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
_____Sd-_______ ______Sd-______ ______Sd-______
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
