DATE OF DISPOSAL: 25.01.2021
Dr. Aswini Kumar Mohapatra,President:
The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Party (in short the O.P.) and for redressal of his grievance before this Forum.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he is a senior citizen and earned some money during his life time. The O.P.No.1 was persuaded the complainant to own a landed property of 4000 sqft. at Darpungia mouza bearing khatta No. 159 , plot No. 35. Being influenced on the persuasions of the first party the complainant entered to an agreement in the name of memorandum of understanding on 16.05.2012. Accordingly the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- only with the O.P. on dated 10.05.2012. In respect of payment of Rs.1,00,000/- the O.P. issued one property bond with the terms and conditions stated therein. Similarly, the complainant deposited Rs.10,000/- for Khata No. 242 plot No. 468 measuring 400 sqft. against which property Bond No. B/1222/12 has been issued by the O.P. As complainant wanted money immediately as such he requested the O.Ps for refund of the money with interest. Accordingly the O.Ps issued cheque No.047580 dated 10.12.2013 for Rs.58,333/-. The complainant submitted cheque No.047579 dated 17.11.2013 before the State Bank of India. The said State Bank of India endorsed the cheque for collection to the AXIX Bank. The Axis Bank ltd. returned the cheque indicating as “funds insufficient” on 27.01.2014. Similarly, the State Bank of India endorsed cheque No. 047580 dated 10.12.2013 to Axis Bank for necessary collection of Rs.58,333/- and in turn, the Axis Bank returned the cheque in question indicating as “funds insufficient”. The complainant informed the O.Ps time and again by running to his official address at Berhampur and Bhubaneswar by investing money of Rs.8000/- for getting back of his money. At every time of approach, the O.Ps assures for return of the money of Rs.1,26,666/- along with further interest but all in vain. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.Ps for payment of Rs.1,26,666/- alongwith further interest, Rs.8,000/- towards the expenditures incurred for running to Berhampur and Bhubaneswar, Rs.30,000/- for exemplary compensation for the harassment, causing mental agony, Rs.5,000/- towards the cost of the litigation in the best interest of justice.
3. Notices were issued to the Opposite Parties but they neither appeared nor filed any written version. As such notice published in the daily newspaper “Anupam Bharat” dated 01.06.2017 for appearance and filing written version by the O.Ps but they did not appear. Hence the O.Ps are declared exparte on dated 23.10.2017.
4. On the date of exparte hearing of the consumer complaint learned counsel for the complainant is present. We heard argument from the advocate for complainant at length and perused the complaint petition, written arguments and gone through the materials placed on the case record. The facts as stated in the complaint petition do not raise any dispute as because the O.P. had refunded the complainants amount paid by the complainant on his request in shape of cheques and the said cheques had not been honoured by the Bank for insufficient of fund. There is no material available in the case record to hold the O.Ps are liable either for unfair trade practice or deficiency in service. The complainant is not a consumer under the Opposite parties and the case does not come within the meaning of Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In the instant case, the grievance of the complainant is a cheque bounce case and this type of grievance squarely comes under the purview of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. This is a clear case coming under the purview of Negotiable Instrument Act.
5. In the result the complainant’s case is dismissed against the O.Ps without cost. The complainant is at liberty to file his complaint before the competent Court having jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance and he may avail the benefit U/S 14(2) of the Limitation Act to meet the ends of justice.
The order is pronounced on this day of 25th January 2021 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the parties free of cost and a copy of same be sent to the server of
