NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/379/2010

STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. SIDHARTH SALES AGENCY - Opp.Party(s)

MR. VISHNU MEHRA

29 Sep 2011

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 379 OF 2010
 
(Against the Order dated 25/08/2009 in Appeal No. 806/2008 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR
Through Chief Manager, India Bazar
Jaipur
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. SIDHARTH SALES AGENCY
Through Director, Kailash Bagadi,
B-23, Govind Marg,
Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :
Ms.Sakshi Gupta, Advocate for
Mr.Vishnu Mehra, Advocate
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 29 Sep 2011
ORDER

        State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (SBBJ), the petitioner herein, was the opp.party before the District Forum.

        Respondent/complainant presented a cheque of Rs.3,64,507/- to the petitioner for crediting in his account.  The cheque was lost in transit when the same was returned dishonoured by the SBBJ, Alwar Branch.  The said cheque was sent for clearance by the petitioner to SBBJ, Alwar Branch.  Being aggrieved, respondent filed complaint before the District Forum claiming the amount of the cheque along with compensation.

-         2  -

        District Forum dismissed the complaint.  Respondent, being aggrieved, filed the appeal before the State Commission.  State Commission partly allowed the appeal of the complainant and directed the petitioner to pay Rs.30,000/- by way of compensation along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till realization.  Rs.5,000/- were awarded by way of costs.

        Petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present revision petition.

        On a contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner that interest and costs could not be awarded when adequate compensation of Rs.30,000/- had already been awarded to the respondent, Notice was issued limited to the point of interest and costs only. 

        Respondent had appeared on the last date of hearing.  He is not present today.  Ordered to be proceeded ex parte.

        We find substance in the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that respondent could not be awarded interest on the amount of compensation.  Rs.30,000/- were awarded to the respondent by way of compensation for the cheque which had been lost in transit.  No interest on the said amount was payable and the State Commission had erred in awarding interest on the said amount. 

-         3  -

Accordingly, the direction issued by the State Commission to pay interest on the sum of Rs.30,000/- is set aside.  Order regarding costs is, however, maintained.  Petitioner is directed to remit the sum of Rs.30,000/- along with costs of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent within 30 days from today, if not already paid, failing which the petitioner shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% on the sum of Rs.30,000/- from the date of passing of the order by the State Commission till realization.

Revision petition stands disposed of in above terms.

 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

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.