DATE OF FILING                    :     27.03.2015.

DATE OF S/R                            :      08.05.2015.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     23.11.2015.

1.         Sujit Karati,

son of late Gour Mohan Karati,

2.         Pintu Karati,

son of late Gour Mohan Karati,

having its office at 167/1, Belilious Road, Kadamtala, P.S. Bantra,

District Howrah………………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

Manager,

Indian Overseas Bank,

Kadamtala Branch, 177/1/1/1, Belilious Road, P.S. Bantra,

District Howrah.…………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.

P    R    E     S    E    N     T

Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.

F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. Complainants, namely, Sujit Karati and Pintu Karati,  by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) have prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to refund Rs. 45,000/- and  to pay Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation and litigation costs of Rs. 50,000/-  along  with other relief or reliefs as the  Forum may deem fit and proper. 

2. It is the case of the complainants  that their company named ‘M/s. Krishna Stationers’ is   the distributor of Micromax Mobile in the district of  Howrah and the  business transactions were made through current account no. 4091. From the said account, complainant no. 1 issued a cheque in favour of O.L.X.in for an amount of Rs. 1,050/- without filling up the payee’s name as per their direction. It is alleged by them that by tampering the seal and signature of complainant no. 1,  the said cheque was placed  before the o.p. bank and the o.p., without verifying the authenticated seal and signature, disbursed Rs. 45,000/- from that account to one, namely, Alex Anthani, which was intimated to o.p. bank and one complaint was also lodged with I/C, Bantra P.S. on 08.8.2014 and one F.I.R. was also registered on the same date vide  Annexure.  Complainant also requested the o.p. to refund the said amount by sending letter particularly on 24.09.2014 vide Annexure.  O.p. replied vide their letter dated 08.08.2014, 06.09.2014 stating that the cheque no. 962886 which was issued by the complainant no. 1 encashed through their CBS  System and the copy of the same was also provided by o.p. bank. So being aggrieved complainant also filed a complaint before Banking Ombudsman and Ombudsman vide their letter dated 01.12.2014 replied that they have already taken up the matter with the concerned o.p. but no fruitful result came out.  Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed the instant case with the aforesaid prayers.

3. Notice was  served. The o.p.  appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, the case was  heard on contest.

4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  ?

2. Whether the complainants are  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5. Both the points are  taken up together for consideration.. We have carefully gone through the written version filed by the o.p. Particularly in para 8 of written version, it is the specific plea of o.p. that the complainant in collusion and connivance with complainant no. 2 as well as the said Alex  Anthony Desouza is trying to malign the reputation of o.p. by way of filing the instant frivolous case. Because a person never issued a cheque without writing the payee’s name and amount even the date of the cheque  is not correctly mentioned by the complainant no. 1 in the F.I.R. Although complainant no. 1 mentioned the date of the cheque as 01.06.2013 in his complaint dated 8.8.2014 filed with I/C, Bantra P.S. But it is admitted by the complainant that he has not written the payee’s name in the said cheque  but mentioned the amount of Rs. 1,050/-.. But on scrutiny of the copy of the said cheque it is very clear that complainant never mentioned the amount of Rs. 1,050/- in the said cheque because in the amount column of the cheque there is no overwriting, rather the amount of Rs. 45,000/- is perfectly written both in words and digits and the name of the current  account bearing no.  4091 is Krishna Stationers, the seal of which is also appearing in the cheque in question and the signature of complainant no. 1 is also perfectly appearing there. So o.p. bank was not at all in a position to doubt about the seal, signature appearing in the said cheque. We also find that the signatures of complainant no. 1 appearing in the cheque in question, in all the annexures, and in the instant complaint petition, are same and identical. Accordingly we find no deficiency on the part of the o.p. In the result, the application fails.     

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 124 of 2015 ( HDF 124  of 2015 )  be and the same is dismissed  contest without  costs  against  the O.P. 

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    Jhumki Saha)                                              

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.