DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, LUCKNOW

CASE No.458 of 2007

       Smt. Tripti Agarwal,

       W/o Sri Rahul Agarwal,

       Partnership Firm M/s Kiara,

       Address:- Rajaram Kumar Plaza-75,

                        Hazratganj, Lucknow.                              

                                                                    ……Complainant

Versus

                 1. ICICI Bank Ltd.,

                     Through Branch Manager,

                     11, Mahatma Gandhi Marg,

                     Hazratganj Branch, Lucknow.

                 2. Cashier,

                     ICICI Bank Ltd.,

                     11, Mahatma Gandhi Marg,

                     Hazratganj Branch, Lucknow.

                 3. Managing Director,

                     ICICI Bank Ltd.,

                     Registered Office:- Landmark Race Course Circle,

                    Badodra-390007.

                                                                               .......Opp. Parties

Present:-

Sri Vijai Varma, President.

Smt. Anju Awasthy, Member.

JUDGMENT

This complaint has been filed by the Complainant against the OPs for payment of amount of cheque of Rs.60,000.00 with 18% interest, compensation of Rs.1,00,000.00 and cost of litigation of Rs.6,500.00.

          The case in brief of the Complainant is that she is a partner in her firm “M/s Kiara” in Raj Kumar Plaza, Hazratganj, Lucknow dealing in the business of the unskilled sarees and suits. The Complainant had opened a current a/c No.628105019777 in the ICICI bank which was operated by the joint signatures of both the a/c holders of such firm. As the

-2-

bank was not providing satisfactory services to the firm for which the Complainant had made a complaint with the branch manager, therefore the officials of the bank used to be angry with the Complainant. The officials of the bank used to stall the matter of giving the cheque books personally to the Complainant’s husband and the official used to say that the cheque book would be sent to them through courier at the address of the a/c holder. The bank had sent a cheque book pertaining to the firm through courier to the Complainant. Due to pre occupation the Complainant could not find out that three cheque nos. 378092, 378093, 378094 were missing from the cheque book. When the Complainant got statement of a/c of three months then she could know that through cheque No.378092 dated 01.11.2006 a sum of Rs.60,000.00 has been taken out from the bank where the signature of the Complainant were forged as the Complainant had not signed the cheque in question. On knowing this fact the Complainant in his firm letter pad wrote a letter on 09.11.2006 to the Chief Manager of ICICI bank, Hazratganj branch. Because of the negligence of the bank employees a heavy amount was taken out from her a/c creating financial problems for the Complainant. When the Complainant’s husband asked for the cheque to be shown to them as to who has made the forged signatures then the officials of the bank refused to give them the information. The Complainant on 09.11.2006 also directed for making stop payment with regard to the other two cheques so that the same could not be misused by anyone. After two months on 07.01.2007 the bank informed the Complainant that the payment of the cheque in question was released after tallying the signatures by the cashier. The name of the person who received the amount was not divulged. When the OPs did not act on the complaint made by the Complainant and the amount which was fraudulently taken out from the bank was not deposited in the bank then the Complainant sent notice to

-3-

the OPs. The Complainant on 09.04.2007 given written information to the SO of Hazratganj regarding the fraud but nothing was done under the pressure of the bank, hence this complaint.

          The OPs have filed the reply wherein it is mainly submitted that the said account was opened on 13.08.2015 in the name of the Firm “M/s Kiara” a partnership firm and as according to the account opening application form, any one of the partner of the firm is authorized to operate the account. The answering OP has always provided its best services to the Complainant and there was no deficiency in service or lapse in the banking practice on the part of bank. As the normal practice of the bank, the answering OP, the cheque book sent to the Complainant at the address mentioned in account opening form. The Complainant had opened the said account on 13.08.2008 and the cheque book was issued to them on 16.08.2005 and sent to them through courier by the central office of the bank according to the normal practice of bank. The guide lines of Reserve Bank of India in this regard is that the banks shall ensure the delivery of cheque book to its account holder, the method of delivery shall be chosen by the bank. The cheque No.378092 was presented and cashed by the bank on 01.11.2006. It is very strange and unbelievable that after more than one year of receiving the cheque book the Complainant never complained about the missing of the cheques as mentioned by her in her complaint. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Complainant first time made such complaint on 09.11.2006 after the encashment of the cheque in question. The said cheque No.378092 was not account payee cheque it was for the payment to “self” or bearer and has been cleared over the counter. The aforesaid cheque bore the signature of the account holder, the Complainant, which tallied with the bank’s record. If the said cheque was not honoured by the bank it would be deficiency

-4-

of service on the part of bank. The answering OP has always paid attention in the said matter and enquired the matter and after the enquiry answering OP found that there was no force in the complaint and the aforesaid cheque bore the signature of the Complainant which tallied with the Bank’s record. In the letter of the Complainant dated 09.11.2006 she herself admitted that “We approached to the bank and on verification of the cheque No.378902………” This clearly indicates that on making such complaint, the Complainant was respectively honoured and bank allowed to verify her signature after showing the said cheque. This fact clearly indicates that Complainant or her representative was always attended by the bank like a good service provider. The answering OP had no reason to stop payment of the aforesaid cheque as the aforesaid cheque bore the signature of the Complainant which tallied with the bank’s record. The answering OP enquired the matter and after the enquiry answering OP found that the complaint was baseless so answering OP conveyed the decision of enquiry by the letter dated 05.04.2007 and also remained in touch with the Complainant as indicated in annexure No.5 of the complaint. The bank has honoured the request of Complainant for stop payment of the cheques as referred in the paragraph.  The bank investigated the matter and after enquiry the bank brought the result of investigation to the notice of the Complainant. There was no deficiency in service or negligence or lapse in the banking practice on the part of bank. The Complainant wrongly demanded the compensation from the answering OP. The bank has acted as per rules and regulations and normal banking practice.

The Complainant has filed an affidavit with 7 annexures. The Complainant has also filed the photocopy of the cheque. The OPs have filed the affidavit of Smt. Kavita Pant, Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. with 2 annexures.

-5-

          Heard Counsel for the OP but none appeared to argue from the side of the Complainant. Perused the entire record.

          Now, it is to be seen as to whether the OPs committed deficiency in service in clearing the cheque in question as according to the Complainant the bank had cleared a cheque with the forged signatures of the Complainant whereas according to the OPs the cheque was cleared as it was bearing the signatures of the Complainant which was duly tallied by the cashier and therefore there was no deficiency in service by the OPs.

          In this regard, the Complainant has filed a copy of the complaint dated 09.11.2006 wherein there is the mention of a fact that a sum of Rs.60,000.00 was debited on account of clearing cheque No.378902 where as the cheque was one of the three cheques missing from the cheque book and that signature on the cheque was forged and did not match with the signatures of the Complainant Tripti Agarwal and therefore the request to credit the amount in her a/c. The Complainant has also filed her affidavit mentioning therein about the cheque in question missing from the cheque book and that through this cheque a sum of Rs.60,000.00 was taken out from her a/c even though the cheque did not bear her signatures and that signature was forged. On the contrary, the OPs have filed an original cheque in the Forum. It is to be noted that the Complainant had moved an application for directing the OPs to produce the original cheque before the Forum and thereafter an order was passed on 05.04.2014 for OP No.1 to produce the original cheque in the Forum and OP No.1 produced the cheque before the Forum on 19.08.2014. But interestingly after the filing of the cheque in question the Complainant did not turn up to question the cheque. The OPs have filed the affidavit of Kavita Pant, Branch Manager of ICICI bank wherein she has stated that cheque No.378092 was presented and encashed by the bank on 01.11.2006 and it was very

-6-

strange that after more than one year of receiving the cheque book the Complainant complained about the missing of the cheques only on 09.11.2006 after the encashment of the cheque in question. It is specifically stated by Branch Manager of the OPs’ bank that the cheque in question was for the payment to “self” or bearer and when it was presented for payment it was honoured by the bank in the normal course of business to its bearer and has been cleared on the counter. The aforesaid cheque bore the signature of the a/c holder which tallied with the bank’s records and if the said cheque was not honoured by the bank it would have been deficiency of service on part of the bank. From just perusal of the cheque in question, it transpires ostensibly that the signature of the Tripti Agarwal on the cheque matched with those on the record of the bank. Besides the circumstances also do not favour the case of the Complainant as it is astonishing that it is after a year that the cheque in question was encashed untill then the Complainant could not know that the cheque was missing. Besides when no action was taken by the bank after she came to know of the alleged fraudulent signatures of the Complainant on the cheque then she should have immediately filed a FIR in the Police Station but that was not done by her. Therefore, the circumstances of the case also do not favour the Complainant and her story does not inspire confidence. As mentioned above, after asking for the original cheque to be presented to the Forum no one from the side of the Complainant appeared to question it. The cheque was cleared as it bore the signatures to the Complainant which tallied with the records and therefore there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the OPs in clearing the cheque. In fact, the Complainant has miserably failed to show that the cheque was a forged one, therefore there does not appear to be any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, therefore the case

-7-

of the Complainant deserves to be dismissed.

ORDER

          The complaint is dismissed.

          The parties to bear their own costs.

     (Anju Awasthy)                                    (Vijai Varma)

          Member                                                   President    

Dated:    1 September, 2015