Date of Filing:15.03.2008<br /> Date of Order:30.06.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> <br /> Dated: 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 710 OF 2008<br /> <br /> <br /> Harish Kumar,<br /> Proprietor,<br /> M/s Hara Om Enterprises,<br /> No.1742, Harish Nilaya,<br /> Geddalahalli,<br /> RMV II Stage,<br /> Bangalore-560 094. Complainant<br /> <br /> <br /> V/S<br /> ICICI Bank Limited,<br /> R.T. Nagar Branch,<br /> No.5, P & T Colony,<br /> R.T. Nagar Main Road,<br /> Next to New Shanthi Sagar,<br /> Bangalore-560 094. Opposite Party<br /> <br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/Sec.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.<br /> The facts of the case are that, the complainant who is customer of the opposite party Bank deposited a cheque bearing No.176870 of Rs.18,500/- for clearance on 13/11/2007. Opposite party neither intimated the complainant about the factual situation of the cheque or gave explanation regarding whereabouts of the cheque. Due to unprofessional approach of the opposite party the complainant was made to run from Pillar to post without fault on his part. Due to the fact of non receipt of the cheque bearing No.176870 from the opposite party which was deposited for encashment, the complainant is deprived of initiating necessary and appropriate Civil and Criminal action against Mr. Venu for recovery of money. Therefore, the opposite party Bank has to compensate and reimburse the losses incurred by the complainant. The opposite party is liable to pay Rs.18,500/- and Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony. Hence, the complaint.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite party. Opposite parties put in appearance through advocate and filed defence version filed which was signed by the advocate for the opposite party. The opposite party contested the matter. <br /> 3. Affidavit evidence filed. Arguments are heard. <br /> 4. The points for consideration are:- <br /> 1. Whether there was any deficiency in service <br /> on the part of the opposite party? <br /> 2. Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation?<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 5. It is an admitted case that the complainant is the customer of the opposite party. It is an admitted fact that the complainant has presented cheque bearing No.176870 drawn on Canara Bank for Rs.18,500/- for clearance on 13/11/2007. This fact has been admitted by the opposite party. It is clearly stated in the defence version that complainant had presented the cheque for clearance and the cheque had been sent for clearance and the cheque got dishonoured. It is the grievance of the complainant that he has not received the dishonoured cheque from the opposite party Bank. Therefore, he was deprived of initiating necessary civil and criminal action against the drawer of the cheque. Therefore, it is the case of the complainant that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in not delivering the dishonoured cheque to the complainant. By reading entire defence version it is not the case of the opposite party that the dishonoured cheque had been sent or delivered to the complainant. The opposite party Bank has not taken defence that cheque has been sent to the complainant. The opposite party Bank has not produced any record or document to show that the dishonoured cheque in question was delivered to the complainant. Therefore, by the defence version it is very clear that the cheque in question was not delivered or sent back to the complainant. It is the duty and obligation of the opposite party Bank to see that the dishonoured cheque was sent to the complainant’s address promptly. But in this case, the opposite party has failed in its duty. The cheque in question had not reached to the complainant. Therefore, naturally he has suffered mental agony and put into lot of inconvenience, hardship, tension etc.,. The complainant has sought an amount of Rs.18,500/- from the opposite party Bank plus compensation. No doubt there was negligence or carelessness on the part of the opposite party Bank in not sending the cheque to the complainant. But that will not entitle the complainant straightway to claim cheque amount from the opposite party. The complainant has got the remedies to recover the amount by filing civil suit against the drawer of cheque. The complainant has not lost the right to proceed against the drawer of cheque Mr. Venu. Even the complaint U/Sec.138 of N.I Act could have been filed by taking endorsement from the concerned Bank that cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. On the basis of that the complainant could have filed a complaint U/Sec.138 of N.I Act. But however since this is a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and there was negligence or carelessness of the opposite party in not sending or delivering the dishonoured cheque to the complainant, for this the complainant should be properly compensated for having suffered mental agony, tension, inconvenience, loss of time etc.,. I feel the ends of justice will be met in awarding Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 6. The complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party Bank is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.3,000/- towards costs of the present proceedings from the opposite party. In the event of opposite party not complying the order within 30days, in that case the compensation amount carries interest at 10% p.a from the date of this order till payment/realization. <br /> <br /> 7. The opposite party Bank is directed to send the amount directly to the complainant by way of D.D or Cheque with intimation to this Forum.<br /> <br /> 8. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 9. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2008.<br /> <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />