Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

175/2008

A.Badusha mohaideen - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

S.B.Viswanathan

13 Oct 2016

ORDER

   Date of Filing :   07.05.2008

                                                                      Date of Order :   13.10.2016

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM,CHENNAI(SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT

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

            DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

                                                                       

C.C.NO.175 / 2008

THURSDAY THIS  13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016

 

A.  Badusha Mohaideen,

S/o. Late A. Abdul Majeed,

Post Box No.437,

Triplicane Post Office,

Triplicane, Chennai -5.                                    ..Complainant

 

                                              ..Vs..

The ICICI Bank Limited,

Rep by its Manager,

Mount Road Branch,

“Shakthi Towers”

RPC, 6^th Floor,

Doorn No.766, Anna Salai,

Chennai – 2.                                                       ..Opposite party.    

 

 

For the Complainant              :    M/s. S.B. Viswanathan & others

For the opposite party           :    M/s. V.V.Giridhar & P.Suresh.

 

 

Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.  The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and Rs.50,000/- as damages for deficiency in service and to pay cost of the complaint.

ORDER

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-  

The complainant submit that he has savings account with cheque facilities in account No.603801515802 with the opposite party bank. The complainant have issued a cheque in favour of one Vasantha vide cheque No.404065 dated 12.11.2007 for a sum of Rs.1324.  The said cheque was presented  through Indian Overseas Bank Santhome Branch on 12.11.2007 and it came up for clearance  to the opposite party bank.,  and they have returned the same on 13.11.2007 with endorsement  “Insufficient Funds”.  The complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.10500/- by cash on 13.11.2007 in the said account.  The complainant further stated that on 12.11.2007  the balance in his savings account was Rs.1059.04 and on 13.11.2007 at 9.30 A.M. the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.10500/- by cash in his savings account, but  on 13.11.2007 the opposite party returned the cheque with endorsement “insufficient funds”  without considering the fact that the balance in the complainant’s saving account on that date Rs.11559.04.  When the complainant enquired about the same with the opposite party bank staff, they have said to have been replied  in an irresponsible and  evasive manner, the said act of the opposite party  amounts to deficiency of service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  As such the complainant sought for a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and Rs.50,000/- as damages for deficiency in service and to pay cost of the complaint.

Written Version of  opposite party is  in briefly as follows:

2.     The opposite party denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein. The opposite party submit that the complainant was maintaining a SB account with the opposite party  bank and he had issued a cheque in favour of the third party for Rs.1324/- and the said cheque was presented on 12.11.2007 with Indian Overseas Bank and on that day the balance in the SB account of the complainant was Rs.1059.04/- and on 13.11.2007 the complainant  has made a deposit of Rs.10,500/- and the balance on 13.11.2007 in his S.B Account was Rs.11,559.04/-.   According to the complainant the cheque issued by him got returned on 13.11.2007 where there was a sufficient balance in his account.   The said cheque issued by the complainant had come to the opposite party for clearance on 12.11.2007 and the same was processed on the morning of 13.11.2007.  When the cheque was processed the balance in the account of the complainant was only 1079.54/- and the value of the cheuqe was Rs.1324/- therefore the cheque issued by the complainant was returned for insufficient funds.  

3.     The opposite party further submit that in the present case admittedly the opening balance on the date of clearance of the cheque or the closing balance on the previous day of the clearance of the cheque vis. 12.11.2007 was only 1079.54 and whereas the complainant had issed the cheque for Rs.1324/- which had come for clearance on the morning of 13.11.2007 and there was no balance in the account of the complainant and subsequent deposit made by the complainant in his account on 13.11.2007 would not be considered for clearing the cheque.   Therefore the subsequent payment of Rs.10,500/- made by the complainant did not cure and defect as the fault is on the part of the complainant as he had issued the cheque when there was no fund in his account.   The alleged damages suffered by the complainant and alleged loss of reputation are false and the same was made for the purpose of the above case and the complainant is not entitled to any compensation.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.   Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Proof affidavit of  opposite party filed and Ex.B1 & Ex.B2 were marked on the side of the opposite party. 

5.      The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-

1.   Whether the opposite party had committed  deficiency of

 service as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.   Whether the complainant is  entitled for the relief sought for

in the complaint?  If so to what extent ?

 

 

6.    POINTS 1 and 2 :

Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, written version filed by the opposite party and the proof affidavit filed by complainant and opposite party, the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 filed on the side of the complainant and Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 filed on the side of opposite party and considered the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the complainant and for the opposite party.

7.     There is no dispute that the complainant has savings account with cheque facilities in account No.603801515802 with the opposite party bank. The complainant have issued a cheque in favour of one Vasantha vide cheque No.404065 dated 12.11.2007 for a sum of Rs.1324/-.  The said cheque was presented  through Indian Overseas Bank Santhome Branch on 12.11.2007 and it came up for clearance  to the opposite party bank.,  and they have returned the same on 13.11.2007 with endorsement  “Insufficient Funds”.  The complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.10500/- by cash on 13.11.2007 in the said account.  The document filed on the side of complainant  and the opposite party are proves the same.

8.     The complainant has raised grievance in this complaint, on 12.11.2007  the balance in his savings account was Rs.1059.04 and on 13.11.2007 at 9.30 A.M. the complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.10500/- by cash in his savings account, but on 13.11.2007 the opposite party returned the cheque with endorsement “insufficient funds”  without considering the fact that the balance in the complainant’s saving account on that date Rs.11559.04.  When the complainant enquired about the same with the opposite party bank staff, they have said to have been replied  in an irresponsible and  evasive manner, the said act of the opposite party  amounts to deficiency of service, as such the complainant filed this complaint claiming Rs.1,00,000/- under two heads i.e deficiency of service  caused by the opposite party and for sufferings of hardship by the complainant.

9.     Whereas the opposite party has resisted the complaint by saying that the admittedly the opening balance on the previous day of the cheque came for clearance in the complainant’s account   i.e 12.11.2007 was only Rs.1079.54 and whereas the complainant has issued a cheque for Rs.1324/- which had came for clearance on the morning of 13.11.2007 and there was no sufficient fund in the account of the complainant  and subsequent deposit made by the complainant in his account on the said date would not be considered for clearing the cheque.  Therefore the cheque was returned due to insufficient fund on the basis of opening balance of the said account is proper as per the practice and procedure followed by the bank.  The subsequent deposit said to have been made by the complainant of Rs.10500/- would not cure the said defect, as such, the fault is on the side of complainant as he had issued the cheque where there is no sufficient fund in his account.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in returning the cheque on the fact there is no sufficient fund.  Further the allegation made by the complainant that the bank staff were replied irresponsible and evasive manner when enquired by the complainant is not true, but the bank staff have properly explained to the complainant.  Therefore the complaint filed by the complainant  is not on valid ground and liable to be dismissed. 

10.    As contended by the opposite party admittedly  the complainant has given the said cheque for Rs.1324/- to one Vasantha, on 12.11.2007,  when there is no sufficient fund in his account.  Further when the said cheque came for clearance on 13.11.2007 on the basis of the opening balance amount available in the said account of the complainant i.e a sum of Rs.1079.54, the said cheque was returned as no sufficient fund, as per the practice and procedure of the opposite party bank is acceptable.  Further though the complainant has stated that he has deposited a sum of Rs.10500/- on 13.11.2007 at 9.30 A.M. is not supported by any documentary evidence.  The complainant not even filed the said remittance slip on his side as document.  On the contrary the opposite party has stated in the affidavit that on verification of the validation report on 13.11.2007, it would clearly establish that on that date at about 8.46 A.M. the cheque came for clearance got returned whereas on 13.11.2007 at about 11.45 A.M. only the complainant has made a deposit of Rs.10.500/- in his account.  The validation report dated 13.11.2007 filed as Ex.B1 and the account ledger inquiry on 13.11.2007 pertaining to the complainant mentioned savings account filed as Ex.B2 are proved the above said opposite party’s contention, that they have acted as per the procedure and   there was no sufficient fund to clear the said cheque as per the available amount in the  opening balance  of the complainant’s account at the time of the cheque came to clearance is acceptable.  Therefore there is no fault on the opposite party bank in returning the said cheque and the said act of the opposite party cannot be considered  as deficiency of service.

11.    Further the citation referred by the  learned counsel for the  opposite party, the decision of Honble Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in the case of

                                II (2009) CPJA 98

BANK OF PUNJAB LTD

..Vs..

JAGIR SINGH

It is squarely applicable for the present case in support of the contention made by the opposite party.

12.    Therefore we are of the considered view that the deficiency of service attributed against the opposite party by the complainant is not valid and not proved.  Therefore the complainant is not entitled for any relief sought for in the complaint against the opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties has to bear their own costs. According the points 1 and 2 are answered.

In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the  13^th    day  of  October   2016.

 

MEMBER-I                    MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s Side documents :

Ex.A1- 12.11.2007     - Copy of Cheque.

Ex.A2- 13.11.2007     - Copy of return Memo.

Ex.A3- 29.2.2008      - Copy of Statement of account.

                    

Opposite parties’ side documents: -    

 

Ex.B1- 13.11.2007     -  Copy of Validation report.

Ex.B2- 13.11.2007     - Copy of account ledger inquiry.

 

MEMBER-I                    MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.