Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/19/2006

Rajesh Kumar Dash - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

K.Ganesan

10 Jan 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 24.11.2005

                                                                          Date of Order : 10.01.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B.                                : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP., : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.19/2006

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019

                                 

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Dash,

S/o. Sri Simadri Dash,

C-12, R.K. Flats,

No.1, Jeevanandam Street,

K.K. Nagar (West),

Chennai – 600 078.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                    

 

                                                                                            ..Versus..

 

ICICI Bank Limited,

Ashok Nagar Branch,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

No.25, First Avenue,

Ashok Nagar,

Chennai – 600 083.                                                    ..  Opposite party.

          

 

Counsel for complainant            :  M/s. K. Ganesan

Counsel for the opposite party  :  M/s. V.V. Giridhar & another

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, physical strain, stress etc, to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for loss of reputation in the business circle of the complainant on account of dishonor of the cheques and a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards compensation for dereliction of duty etc with cost  to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that though he was not interested in availing overdraft facility believing upon the sweet words of the opposite party’s agents availed overdraft facility for purchasing a car to the tune of Rs.2,20,000/- on 09.02.2005.  The opposite party also issued a bankers cheque for Rs.20,000/- in due compliant and in settlement with Kotak Mahendra Car loan Account leaving a withdrawal balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.   The complainant submits that after receipt of the cheque book from the opposite party and after ascertaining the credit of the amount, the complainant issued cheque No.829451 dated:09.03.2005 in favour of M/s. ESCROW – Account PNB for a sum of Rs.99,450/- and another cheque No.829452 dated:17.03.2005 in favour of M/s. Seawaves Printers for Rs.50,000/-.  Both the cheques were returned dishonoured with the remarks ‘Insufficient Funds’.   The only reason given by the opposite party for the dishonour of cheque is that the complainant has not deposited the original R.C. Book.   The complainant submits that the opposite party offered a personal loan of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant and the same has been credited into the complainant’s car overdraft account which is a joint account along with Sradhanjali Dash account on 22.04.2005 and issued a cheque bearing No.723171 in the name of Sradhanjali Dash for a sum of Rs.2,96,694/- in his account having the facility of either or survivor.  The complainant also issued 4 cheques namely 829466 dated:22.04.2005 for Rs.10,000/-, cheque No.829464 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.1,56,000/-, cheque No.829463 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and cheque No.829462 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.70,000/-.  But all the cheques were dishonoured with the remark of signature of the Joint Account Holder differs.   But the complainant had the account in his own name with the facility of either or survivor.   The complainant submits that the dishonour of the cheques and non-credit of the overdraft car loan amount caused great inconvenience, mental agony and loss of reputation.  The act of the opposite party caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

 2.     The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite party is as follows:

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite party states that the complainant is the account holder of their branch at Ashok Nagar having account No.007705007342.   The opposite party states that the complainant availed car overdraft facility with the opposite party for a total credit limit of Rs.2,20,000/-.   Due cheque for Rs.20,000/- was issued and the balance of Rs.2,00,000/- has not been credited into the a/c of the complainant.   As per the said car OD facility, the bank will provide the credit facility against the car as the security.  For availing this facility, the borrower should give the RC Book of his car and once the borrower surrenders the RC Book with the bank, the bank will credit the loan amount in the account of the complainant and allow the borrower to operate the account.   The complainant has not complied with the conditions that the complainant has not deposited the RC Book.  The opposite party states that the cheques issued by the complainant without ascertaining the deposit of amount leads the cheque bounce charges as well of return of cheque for the reason insufficient of fund.  The opposite party states that the personal loan of Rs.3,00,000/- was sanctioned and credited into the Joint Account of the complainant vide cheque issued in favour of Sradhanjali Dash.  The cheques issued by the complainant without the signature of the Joint A/c holder was rightly returned. Thereafter, the opposite party altered the account into either or survivor and cleared the cheques.  The return of cheque without the signature of the Joint Account holder shall not cause any inconvenience.  The compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A20 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party is filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite party.

4.      The points for consideration is:-

Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of reputation and a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards dereliction of duty with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Heard the Counsels also.   Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that though he was not interested in availing overdraft facility; but believing upon the sweet words of the opposite party’s agents availed overdraft facility for purchasing a car to the tune of Rs.2,20,000/- on 09.02.2005.   The opposite party also issued a bankers cheque for Rs.20,000/- in due compliant and in settlement with Kotak Mahendra Car loan Account leaving a withdrawal balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/-.   The said contention is accepted by the opposite party that in para No.4 which reads as follows:

“The opposite party admits that he is the account holder of their branch at Ashok Nagar having account No.007705007342.  It is also admitted that the complainant had availed a car OD facility with the opposite party for the total credit limit of Rs.2,20,000/-.  As per the said car OD facility, the bank will provide the credit facility against the car as the security.  For availing this facility, the borrower should give the RC Book of his car and once the borrower surrenders the RC Book with the bank, the bank will credit the loan amount in the account of the complainant and allow the borrower to operate the account”.

6.     Further the contention of the complainant is that after receipt of the cheque book from the opposite party and after ascertaining the credit of the amount, the complainant issued cheque No.829451 dated:09.03.2005 in favour of M/s. ESCROW – Account PNB for a sum of Rs.99,450/- and another cheque No.829452 dated:17.03.2005 in favour of M/s. Seawaves Printers for Rs.50,000/-.  But both the cheques were returned dishonoured with the remarks ‘Insufficient Funds’ which amounts to deficiency in service.   The only reason given by the opposite party for the dishonour of cheque is that the complainant has not deposited the original R.C. Book; is also not acceptable because as per Ex.A19 & Ex.A20, the R.C. Book was duly deposited on 09.02.2005 & 12.02.2005 respectively proves that the opposite party made a wrong plea in this case.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party offered a personal loan of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant and the same has been credited into the complainant’s car overdraft account which is a joint account along with Sradhanjali Dash account on 22.04.2005 as per Ex.A6 and issued a cheque bearing No.723171 in the name of Sradhanjali Dash for a sum of Rs.2,96,694/- in his account having the facility of either or survivor.  The complainant also issued 4 cheques namely 829466 dated:22.04.2005 for Rs.10,000/-, cheque No.829464 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.1,56,000/-, cheque No.829463 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and cheque No.829462 dated:22.04.2005 for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and all the cheques were dishonoured with the remark of signature of the Joint Account Holder.   But the complainant contended that the account in his own name with the facility of either or survivor; is not acceptable because, it is very clear that the alleged account is a joint account and is converted into either or survivor and thereafter, all the cheques issued by the complainant were duly honoured as per Ex.A6, Ex.A10 and Ex.A11.   Further the contention of the complainant is that due to the dishonour of the cheques and non-credit of the overdraft car loan amount caused great inconvenience mental agony and loss of reputation.  But the complainant has not meticulously proved the alleged loss. The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- towards compensation under several heads without proper proof.

7.     The learned Counsel for the opposite party contended that admittedly, the complainant availed car overdraft facility with the opposite party for a total credit limit of Rs.2,20,000/-.   Due cheque for Rs.20,000/- was issued and the balance of Rs.2,00,000/- has not been credited into the a/c of the complainant.   Because the complainant has not complied with the conditions that the complainant has not deposited the RC Book.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A19 & Ex.A20, it is very clear that the complainant has deposited the RC book quite advance.  On the other hand, the opposite party has not credited the sanctioned car loan OD amount of Rs.2,00,000/- proves the deficiency in service.   Further the contention of the opposite party is that the cheques issued by the complainant without ascertaining the deposit of amount leads the cheque bounce charges as well of return of cheque for the reason Insufficient of fund.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the personal loan of Rs.3,00,000/- was sanctioned and credited into the Joint Account of the complainant vide cheque issued in favour of Sradhanjali Dash.  The cheques issued by the complainant without the signature of the Joint A/c holder was rightly returned. Thereafter, the opposite party altered the account into either or survivor and cleared the cheques.  The return of cheque without the signature of the Joint Account holder shall not cause any inconvenience.  The compensation claimed is imaginary and exorbitant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards compensation for non-crediting the sanctioned amount by way of overdraft even after satisfying the conditions with a cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed  to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) being compensation for non-crediting the sanction amount by way of overdraft even after satisfying the conditions with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant. 

The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of January 2019. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

		Copy of letter sent by the opposite party
		Copy of loan repayment schedule issued by the opposite party
		Copy of post dated cheques, pronote, schedule issued by the complainant
		Copy of Personal Loan Agreement
		Copy of ICICI Bank direct Mandate Form
		Copy of Statement of account for the period from 01.04.2005 to 30.04.2005
		Copy of letter of the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of letter of the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of letter of the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of fax message sent by the opposite party to complainant
		Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of reply sent by the opposite party to the complainant
		Copy of statement of account
		Copy of legal notice sent by the complainant to the opposite party
		Copy of reply sent by the Counsel for the opposite party
		Copy of letter from the opposite party to complainant
		Copy of reply from the complainant to opposite party

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  NIL

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT