Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/19/2020

Nand Kishore - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director, HDFC Bank House, - Opp.Party(s)

Ajay Saini

13 Dec 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI.     

                                                           Complaint No.         19 of 2020.                                                                                      Date of Institution:  28.01.2020

                                                           Date of order:                   13.12.2023

 

Nand Kishore  son of Sh. Jai Dayal, resident of House No. 495, Subhash Chowk, Ward No.14, Charkhi Dadri, District Charkhi Dadri.

..Complainant.

                                                VERSUS

1.Managing Director, HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013.

2.Branch Manger, HDFC Bank, Rohtak Road, Charkhi Dadri 127306

                                                                 ..Opposite parties.

                   COMPLAINT UNDER THE CONSUMER                                                PROTECTION ACT,

Before: -   Hon’ble Sh. Manjit Singh Naryal, President

                Hon’ble Sh. Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member.

 

Argued by: Sh. Ajay Saini,Adv. for complainant.

                   Sh. Dharmender Sharma, authorized representative on behalf of  OP                     no.2.

                    OP no.1 already exparte .

 

O R D E R

1.                 Brief facts of this case are that complainant received a cheque no.01454 dated 05.04.2018 of Rs.63,000/- in his usual course of business  which was deposited  in account no. 19681000018934.  It is averred that complainant received a telephonic call from OP no.2 that the abovesaid cheque has been dishonored by the drawer’s bank i.e. ICICI Bank, Branch Uklana Mandi. On receiving telephonically information when the complainant visited the office of OP no.2 and asked to return the dishonoured cheque alongwith its return memo, the OP no.2 did not provide the same and asked to wait for 2 to 3 working days. After waiting for 2 to 3 days the complainant again visited the office of OP no.2 than OP no.2 said that the abovesaid cheque has already been dispatched through courier service and same would be delivered in two or three working days. Against visiting the office of OP no.2 then OP no.2 said that the abovesaid cheque has been misplaced by his staff somewhere and they are trying to trace it out. Subsequently, the complainant had written letters dated 05.10.2019 and 04.11.2019 to OPs but to no avail. The complainant got served a legal notice dated 21.12.2019 through Mr. Ajay Saini, Advocate (Ex.C7) to the OPs. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the OPs, he had to suffer mental agony, humiliation and harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such he had to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.

2.                Upon notice, the OP no.2 appeared. The OP no.2 filed his written statement, whereas OP no.1 was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 17.03.2020.

                   The OP no.2 in written statement has submitted that the cheque was sent to the complainant through courier on 06.03.2018 as evident from the photocopy of register containing courier dispatch record Mark A. When the cheque was sent by courier service, question of lose of cheque does not arise at all. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP no.2 In the end, prayer for dismissal of complaint with costs was made.

3.                     To prove its complaint, the counsel for complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant as Exhibit CW1/A and documents Ex. C-1 to Ex.C-9 and closed the evidence vide order dt. 06.06.2022.

4.                On the other hand, the OP no.2 closed the evidence after tendering into evidence affidavit Ex. RW-1/A on 13.04.2023.              

5.                We have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both the parties and gone through the entire material available on record thoroughly and carefully.

6.                The admitted facts are that OP no.2 has received a cheque for Rs. 63,000/- lodged by the complainant which was credited in the account of the complainant bearing no. 19681000018934 on 06.03.2018. The said cheque dishonoured hence debited from the account on the same day on 06.03.2018 as evident from the bank statement submitted by the complainant Ex.C3. The ambiguity prevails whether the OP no.2 has returned the dishonored cheque with “Return Memo” from the drawer bank viz. ICICI Bank to the complainant or not.

                   The OP no.2 has submitted affidavit Ex.RW1/A dated 13.04.2023 stating that after dishonor of abovesaid cheque a telephonic message was also sent by the respondent bank to the complainant and the cheque after its dishonor was sent to the complainant/petitioner through courier service on 06.03.2018 Mark A. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent bank. However, the authorized person of the OP no.2 viz. Shri Dharamender Sharma, Clerk, HDFC Bank, Rohtak Road, Charkhi Dadri has not given any evidence/delivery report in support of his statement that the dishonoured cheque was delivered to the complainant/petitioner.

                   It has been observed that not returning the dishonoured cheque to the complainant is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP no.2. This has restrained the complainant to seek other legal remedy for taking payment from the drawer. As such, the complainant has suffered financial loss due to negligence on the part of OPs.

7.                Keeping in view all above referred facts and circumstances of the case, the present complaint filed by the complainant is hereby partially allowed and an award is passed against the OPs as under:-

1. OPs i.e. HDFC Bank Rohtak Road, Charkhi Dadri is directed to pay 50% of the cheque amount i.e. Rs. 31,500/- (50% of  Rs.63,000/-)  alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of receipt  of dishonoured cheque  by the OP no.2 i.e. 06.03.2018.
2. The complainant is also entitled to Rs.5,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by him alongwith Rs.5,500/- as litigation expenses. 

8.          This order be communicated to the parties free of costs and file be consigned to the record-room.

Announced:                                     

Dated:13.12.2023.