By: Miss. R.K.Madanavally, Member (In-Charge of President)
The complainant had purchased a bike with the financial assistance of opposite party No.3. At the time of availing the loan the complainant had submitted 36 cheque leaves, each amounts Rs.1552/-.
On 6/6/13 one of the cheques submitted by the complainant was returned due to the insufficient fund. When the complainant came to know about this fact he had paid the amount through the collection agent. In the next month, ie, in July he had remitted Rs.1700/- in his account. But the opposite party No.2 had again presented the cheque which was already returned in June. Thus an amount of Rs.449.44 was taken from his account. As the cheque return charge was withhold by the opposite party No.2, the cheque No.18782 which was presented in the month of July was also returned and he lost Rs.393.26 Rupees.
Because of all these incidents the complainant had to pay Rs.2010 as fine towards opposite party No.2. Thus the presentation of cheque which are already returned by the opposite party No.2 caused much financial loss and hardships to the complainant. Hence this complaint.
All opposite parties appeared and filed detailed version. Opposite party No.1 submitted that they are not aware of the two wheeler loan of the complainant. It was admitted by them that on 6.6.13 and on 19.6.13, cheque No.18781 was presented for collection and the same were returned due to insufficient funds and Rs. 393.26 and 449.44 are levied respectively as the cheque bouncing charges.
So also on 6.7.13 cheque No.18782 was presented for collection and it was bounced due to insufficient funds. At that time the available balance in the account was Rs.1306.30. As per the RBI guidelines, opposite party No.1 had levied cheque bouncing charge of Rs.393.26. The same cheque was again presented on 19.7.13 and as usual it was also bounced due to insufficient funds and opposite party had charged Rs.154.74 as cheque bouncing charge. The same incident was repeated in the case of cheque No.19004 also.
According to opposite party No.1, the complainant is liable to pay the cheque bouncing charges as per the agreement and there is no deficiency committed by them and the complainant is not entitled for any relief.
The availing of loan was admitted by opposite party No.2 in their version. The complainant had specifically agreed that he will maintain sufficient balance in the account so as to honour the cheques issued to opposite party No.2. Since the cheques presented were dishonored, the complainant is liable to pay the cheque bouncing charges. All acts done by the opposite party No.2 were legally supposed to do More over this count has no jurisdiction to try the case since the arbitration clause is there and the complaint has to be dismissed with cost.
The 3rd opposite party admitted that they were the dealer of the bike and the complainant has no prayer against them and so their name is to be deleted from the complaint.
The issues arises for our consideration here in are;
I) Whether the opposite parties are deficient in service?
ii) If so relief and cost?
Point No.1 and 2
The complainant and opposite party No.1 had adduced oral evidence and Ext. A1 to A11 and B1 to B4 were marked respectively. The complainant is seeking relief against opposite party No.2.
Here the specific case of the complainant is that opposite parties had levied cheque bouncing charges continuously and because of that reasons, he had sustained huge monitory loss.
As per the written version of opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2, it was revealed that, they are bound to collect the cheque bouncing charges in accordance with the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. In this case 3 cheques were presented by opposite parties which were returned as the reason stated, insufficient funds. The same cheques were presented again and at that time also the same were returned.
If the complainant had taken effort in the first instance itself there would not arise the same situation. Hence 3 cheques were returned. Opposite parties had no case that the complainant was a defaulter except these 3 incidents. Opposite parties had every right to levy the cheque bouncing charges. We are helpless to bar the opposite parties from levying the cheque bouncing charges as it included in the guidelines of RBI.
As per Ext. A8, an amount of Rs.2010 was charged as fines from the complainant. There is no satifactory explanation regarding the above fine amount by opposite parties. As a fine the cheque bouncing charge was lievied by opposite parties . But the opposite parties were failed to answer about the fine amount mentioned in Ext. A8. Already a fine was charged from the complainant. So charging two types of fine amount in one matter is against law and it is a clear example of deficiency and unfair trade practice. The Ext. A8 shows that EMI amount Rs.1500/-, cheque bouncing charge 450/-and penal interest Rs.8 ie Rs.2010 in total. But according to A9 series, an amount of Rs.1600/- was paid on 5/5/14. Ext. A8 was issued on 17.5.14. There is no clarification for the two payments in one month.
Hence we order that opposite party No.2 shall remit Rs.2010/- to the complainant along with a cost of Rs.1000/- within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order.
Dated this 23rd day of September, 2015
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER (In-Charge of President)
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A11
Ext.A1 : Schedule issued by opposite party in favour of the complainant
Ext.A2 : Letter sent by the complainant to opposite party dated 22/07/2013.
Ext A3 : Summery of accounts as on 31-03-2013 by opposite party
Ext A4 : Receipt dated 07/07/2014
Ext A5 : Instruction kept by opposite party
Ext.A6 : Retail invoice prepared by opposite party
Ext.A7 : Payment receipt
Ext A8 : Payment receipt
Ext A9 : Receipts
Ext A10 : Retail loan pay -in-slip
Ext A11 : List of PDC'S/Security PDC's Can celled and Retained with opposite party for onward destruction
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party :
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Ext. B1 to B4
Ext.B1 : Letter issued by 1st opposite party to complainant
Ext.B2 : Summary of account
Ext.B3 : Inward Clearing Instruments.
Ext.B4 : Inward Clearing Instruments.
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER (In-Charge of President)
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
