View 253 Cases Against Karnataka Bank
View 2710 Cases Against Karnataka
DR. SHARMA filed a consumer case on 30 Sep 2016 against KARNATAKA BANK in the East Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/643/2014 and the judgment uploaded on 09 Mar 2017.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,
SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092
C.C. NO. 643/14
Shri D.R. Sharma
DA-8, 2nd Floor
Main Vikas Marg
Shakarpur, Delhi – 110 092 ….Complainant
Vs.
No. U75, Ground Floor, Kalra Complex
Mother Dairy Road, Shakarpur
Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092
Mall Road, Delhi – 110 054
N-1865, Sanjay Basti
Timarpur, New Delhi – 110 001 ….Opponents
Date of Institution: 15.10.2014
Judgment Reserved for : 30.09.2016
Judgment Passed on : 21.10.2016
CORUM:
Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)
Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)
Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)
JUDGEMENT
This complaint has been filed by Shri D.R. Sharma praying for directions to OP to provide the principle amount of loan with interest for unpaid period, Rs. 25,000/- as compensation for mental harassment against OP-1 Karnataka Bank, OP-2 Punjab National Bank and Shri Bhimsen OP-3.
2. It is stated that the complainant had given a friendly loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- to OP-3 on assurance that the said loan shall be repaid shortly. In discharge of his liability, OP-3 issued 2 cheques of Rs. 20,000/- each bearing no. 415848 and 415849 dated 25.09.2012 and 25.10.2012 respectively. The said cheques were presented on 21.11.2012 and 15.01.2013 respectively but both cheques were returned on 24.10.2012 and 17.01.2013 by OP-1, with memo stating “Kindly contact Drawer/Drawee Bank and please present again”. One of the cheque was represented, but was returned with the same remark.
Letters dated 26.02.2013 and 04.03.2013 were written to OP-2 – Punjab National Bank seeking clarification with respect to the remark in return memo. It was further stated that OP-2 reverted in email dated 05.03.2013 that as per code 5, allotted by RBI, the reason for return “Kindly contact the drawer/drawee bank” was passed through the system of presenting bank, under CTC system. It was also clarified that the above stated reason was used in 2 cases only. (i) cheques were unusable and/or (ii) insufficient funds.
The complainant had alleged that the details were not written on the return memos. Thus, complainant had alleged deficiency in services on the part of OP-2.
The complainant had placed photocopies of cheques, issued by OP-3 as Annexure-1, return memo as Annexure-2, letter to OP-3 dated 02.01.2014 as Annexure-3, letters dated 04.03.2013 and 26.02.2013 addressed to Punjab National Bank as Annexure-4, email dated 05.03.2013 as Annexure-5.
3. Notice of the complaint was served on OPs. OP-1 filed their WS, but OP-2 did not file their WS, thus they were proceeded ex-parte. OP-1 in their written version asserted that there was no deficiency on their part and they were just the collecting bank and they had just presented the cheque to OP-2. Thereafter, parties were directed to file evidence by way of affidavit. However, none filed their evidence, neither the complainant nor OP-1.
4. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the complainant and perused the material placed on record. The complainant has not filed any evidence by way of affidavit. Since the complainant has failed to prove the documents annexed with the complaint, they cannot be looked into.
The complainant has prayed for relief against OP-2 only, the bank of OP-3, the complainant is not a consumer qua OP-2. As the complainant is not a consumer, thus he cannot invoke jurisdiction of this forum. The complaint is dismissed without orders to cost.
Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(DR. P.N. TIWARI) (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)
Member Member
(SUKHDEV SINGH)
President
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.