DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No. 701/2006

Starion India Pvt. Ltd.,

11 udyog Kendra, greater Noida, UP

Through its directors

                                                                                         ….Complainant

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

at branch office

H-2, Green Park Extension Branch,

New Delhi

through its Branch Manager.

                   ….Opposite Party

                                                  Date of Institution        :      27.11.2006      Date of Order              :       18.11.2017

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

ORDER

The main prayers of the complainant are that the OP be directed  to pay back the illegal withdrawal of Rs.7 lacs to the complainant with interest at appropriate rate and to pay cost of this complaint alongwith mental agony, hardship compensation.

The brief facts of the case are that one unknown imposter using fraud cheque bearing No. 220788 with fraud signatures on the cheque as well as supporting document had withdrawn from OP’s Delhi Green Park Branch an amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- from the complainant’s account No.000705002437 on 25.05.2006 while the original cheque No.220788 was in possession of the complainant. Even otherwise, the clearance of the abovesaid cheque was not possible before 3.1.05.06 owing to issuance of this cheque to M/s Alok Industries on post dated cheque basis. For precaution the cheque No.200788 was procured back from the party and is in the possession of the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant immediately tendered a written complaint on 29.05.2006 to the OP’s Green Park branch and also filed a complaint at Hauz Khas police station.  The complainant also reported the matter to Bisrath police station (UP).  It is stated as follows:-

“That the ICICI Bank vide their letter dated 30/05/2006 endorsed to the Houz Khas Police Station (Xerox Annexure G) tried to throw away the Liability of Negligence. But it accepted the Liability in these words:

“Account holder 000705002435 – Starion India Private Limited visited Green Park branch on 29-05-2006 disputing payment of Cheque number 220788 stating that the same was with them…”

And say further:

“ICICI Bank Green Park Branch had made the payment of same cheque no. on 25-05-2006 for Rs.7,00,000.00 favouring “Self….”  And “ The Bank has made payment in due course, without negligence and based on the apparent tenor of the instrument”.

The above ICICI Bank’s statement itself shows that apparent  negligence. In one side, it accepts the wrong payment move to the imposter. But at the other side, admits that it has done no negligence, in spite of knowing this fact that withdrawal has been done from a fraud cheque with fraud signatures on it.”

It clearly shows that the OP was negligent at the time of clearing the cheque.  The complainant filed written representation and pursued the matter several times with the OP bank for early return of money but the OP did not pay any attention. The complainant also sent a copy of representation to the Reserve Bank of India. The RBI took the notice of this complaint and referred the matter to the Banking Ombudsman. The Banking Ombudsman booked this case vide complaint No.4440/05-06. In order to get prompt relief the complainant decided to withdraw the case from the Ombudsman and filed the complaint before this Forum.

OP has inter-alia denied about the forgery of the cheque/supporting documents/signatures or that there was any negligence on the part of the OP. It is stated that this Forum has no jurisdiction to deal with the complaint since critical detailed investigation is required in the present alleged allegation and only civil/criminal courts have the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain the present matter.  OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

          Affidavits in evidence have been filed on behalf of the parties.

          Written Arguments have also been filed on behalf of the parties.

          We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also carefully gone through the record.

We must say at once that the copies of the judgments mentioned in the complaint have not been filed before us to support the contention that in the case of forgery of a cheque the bank cannot escape from its liability in comparing fraud signature with that of the account holder and in such a situation clearance of imposter’s cheque amounts to deficiency in service. 

From a perusal of order sheets recorded by our predecessors it seems that two original cheques i.e. one in possession of the complainant and second in possession of the OP were got filed in the forum and sent for CIFL report through SHO PS Bisarakh, Greater Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar (U.P.) where the FIR No.86/2006 U/s 420/467/468/471/379 IPC in respect of the cheque in question was registered. It further appears that the report from the office of Joint Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Agra, UP has been received by this Forum on 05.01.2015 but the original cheques were sent to the court of CJM, Gautam Budh Nagar in the said criminal case pending in his court. The CJM did not bother to return the original two cheques to this Forum despite number of reminders sent to him/her. However, we are of the considered opinion that since the expert report from the office of Forensic Science Laboratory, Agra has been received, the production of the two original cheques is not at all necessary for the purposes of deciding the present complaint.

From a perusal of the report it appears that there were some  addition, alteration or erasures in the cheques.  Therefore, the question which has to be decided by this Forum is whether it was a case of committing forgery of the cheque, supporting document and the signature of the Complainant and that issue must be sub-judice in the criminal case pending before the court of Ld. CJM, Gautam Budh Nagar.  Therefore, in the absence of any case law being cited on the issue on behalf of the complainant, we are of the considered opinion that this Forum is not competent to decide this issue. The issue must be left to be decided by the competent court of law. 

In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss it with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 18.11.17.