Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/168/2016

G.R.Srinivasan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Indian Overseas Bank - Opp.Party(s)

K.Ganesan, P.Asha Rao

24 Jan 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 13.04.2016

                                                                          Date of Order : 22.01.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A., L.L.B., PGDCLP.               : MEMBER-I

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP.  : MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.168/2016

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 22^ND DAY OF JANUARY 2019

                                 

Mr. G.R. Srinivasan,

S/o. Mr. Ramakrishnan,

No.7/5, Munuswamy street,

Gandhi Nagar,

Ekkattuthangal,

Chennai – 600 032.                                                      .. Complainant.                                                        

 

                                                                                            ..Versus..

 

1. M/s. Indian Overseas Bank,

Represented by its Chief Manager,

Ekkattuthangal Branch,

No.32, Defence Officer’s Colony,

Chennai – 600 032.

 

2. M/s. Indian Overseas Bank,

Represented by Chief General Manager,

No.763, Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.

 

3. M/s. Canara Bank,

Represented by its Asst. General Manager,

Guindy Branch,

No.1, Jawahar Lal Nehru Salai,

Ekkattuthangal,

Chennai – 600 032.                                                ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant                       :  M/s. K. Ganesan & another

Counsel for the opposite parties 1 & 2 :  M/s. K. Balajee & another

Counsel for the 3^rd opposite party        :  M/s. K.P. Kiran Rao

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, pain, sufferings etc with cost of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he is maintaining a Savings Bank Account bearing A/c No.108501000012824 with the 1^st opposite party bank.  On 30.12.2015, the complainant had issued a cheque bearing No. 466148 for a sum of Rs.14,376/- drawn on Indian Overseas Bank i.e. the 1^st opposite party towards the electricity consumption charges in favour of  SE/CEDC/SOUTH.  The complainant submits that on 28.12.2015, the complainant is having balance in his account Rs.55,674/-. The complainant submits that on 12.01.2016, he was informed by the electricity department that the cheque issued in favour of electricity board was returned and dishonoured and directed the complainant to bring the white meter card along with receipt for making necessary cancellation entry already done by them.  Hence, the complainant immediately rushed to the electricity board office on 13.01.2016 along with the white meter card, the TNEB Department Authorities cancelled the entry already effected in the white meter card.  Thereafter, the complainant made request with Junior Engineer and Superintending Engineer to permit the complainant to pay the EB charges (Bill) to avoid unnecessary disconnection of the electricity connection, for no fault of the complainant.  But the TNEB has refused the request of the complainant.  After prolonged discussion with EB officials, the complainant was advised to pay current consumption charges with a sum of Rs.250/- towards dishonour of cheque for each card and a sum of Rs.60/- towards additional charges etc for a total sum of Rs.15,126/- was paid by the complainant through Demand Draft on 13.01.2016 to the opposite party.  The complainant submits that on 19.01.2016, the complainant issued a letter to the 1^st opposite party by enclosing a copy of the returned cheque and pass book along with receipts of dishonour of cheque etc was duly acknowledged by the 1^st opposite party and sent an evasive reply dated:21.01.2016.   The complainant submits that on 25.01.2016 the Electricity Board charged a sum of Rs.110/- towards bank charges inturn, the complainant issued a letter dated:01.02.2016 addressed to 3^rd opposite party to provide necessary return memo relating to the impugned cheque.   The 3^rd opposite party on 08.02.2016, informed the complainant that the 1^st opposite party alone returned the cheque dishonoured with the reason ‘insufficient of funds’.     The negligent act of the 1^st opposite party and deficiency in service of the opposite parties caused great mental agony.  Hence, the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties 1 & 2 is as follows:-

The opposite parties 1 & 2 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The opposite parties 1 & 2 states that the complainant issued a cheque bearing No.466148 dated:30.12.2015 in favour of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and was not sent to the 1^st opposite party bank for clearing and they have no knowledge regarding the dishonour of the cheque.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 state that the 1^st opposite party received the letter dated:19.01.2016 received from the complainant regarding the dishonour of cheque and the same was replied by the 1^st opposite party that they have not returned the impugned cheque was replied.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 & 2 and hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the 3^rd  opposite party is as follows:-

The 3^rd opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The 3^rd opposite party states that in due response to the complainant’s letter dated:01.02.2016, the 3^rd opposite party confirmed the fact of dishonour of the impugned cheque by the 1^st opposite party with the reason ‘Funds Insufficient’ and advised the complainant to approach the 1^st opposite party for clarification. On 08.02.2016, the 3^rd opposite party sent a, letter confirming  the said fact also.   The 3^rd opposite party states that they are the collecting banker for the Electricity Board and the impugned cheque bearing No.466148 dated:30.12.2016 for Rs.14,376/- in favour of the Electricity Board was sent for clearance by the 1^st opposite party who is the complainant’s banker which was returned dishonoured with an endorsement ‘Insufficient Fund’ by the 1^st opposite party.  The 3^rd opposite party on 08.02.2016 enclosed the copy of return memo and copy of cheque image extracted from RBI website.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 3^rd opposite party and the 3^rd opposite party is not liable for payment of any compensation.  

4.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A12 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is filed and no documents marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 2.  Proof affidavit of the 3^rd opposite party is filed and documents Ex.B1 & Ex.B2 are marked on the side of the 3^rd opposite party.

5.      The points for consideration is:-

Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.10,000/- as prayed for?

6.      On point:-

Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  Heard the respective Counsels also.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The learned Counsel for the complainant contended that admittedly, the complainant is maintaining a Savings Account bearing A/c No.108501000012824 with the 1^st opposite party bank.  On 30.12.2015, the complainant issued a cheque bearing No. 466148 for a sum of Rs.14,376/- drawn on Indian Overseas Bank i.e. the 1^st opposite party towards the electricity consumption charges in favour of  SE/CEDC/SOUTH.  Further the contention of the complainant is that on 28.12.2015, the complainant is having balance amount of Rs.55,674/- in his account.   Ex.A4 is the copy of bank pass book.  Further the contention of the complainant is that on 12.01.2016, the complainant was informed by the electricity department that the cheque issued in favour of electricity board was returned as dishonoured due to ‘Insufficient Fund’ and directed the complainant to bring white meter card along with receipt for making necessary cancellation of entry already done by them. Hence, the complainant immediately rushed to the electricity board office on 13.01.2016 along with the white meter card and made a request for cancellation of entry effected in the white meter card and unnecessary disconnection. After prolonged disconnection with EB officials, the complainant was advised to pay a  sum of Rs.250/- towards dishonour of cheque and a sum of Rs.60/- towards additional charges etc for a total sum of Rs.15,126/- as per Ex.A2 & Ex.A3 which was paid by way of a Demand Draft on 13.01.2016. 

7.     Further the contention of the complainant is that on 19.01.2016, the complainant issued a letter to the 1^st opposite party enclosing a copy of the returned cheque and pass book along with receipts of dishonour of cheque etc was duly acknowledged by the 1^st opposite party and sent an evasive reply dated:21.01.2016 as per Ex.A7.  Further the contention of the complainant is that on 25.01.2016 the Electricity Board charged a sum of Rs.110/- towards bank charges as per Ex.A8 inturn, the complainant issued a letter dated:01.02.2016 addressed to 3^rd opposite party to provide necessary return memo relating to the impugned cheque as per Ex.A9.   The 3^rd opposite party on 08.02.2016, informed the complainant that the 1^st opposite party alone returned the cheque dishonoured with the reason ‘Insufficient of Funds’.   Ex.A10 is the letter along with return memo.  The negligent act of the 1^st opposite party and deficiency in service of the opposite parties caused great mental agony.  The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- towards compensation and cost. 

8.     The contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 have admitted in their written version para No.4 that the complainant issued cheque bearing No.466148 dated:30.12.2015 in favour of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and denied in para No.5 of the written version that the cheque was not sent to the 1^st opposite party bank for clearance and they have no knowledge regarding the dishonour of the cheque.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.B1, it is very clear that the cheque image has been extracted from the computer as per RBI website showing presenting bank number, payer bank number etc with return memo proves the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 1 & 2 to the extent of unfair trade practice.   Further the contention of the opposite parties 1 & 2 is that the 1^st opposite party received the letter dated:19.01.2016 received from the complainant regarding the dishonour of cheque was duly replied.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A6 & Ex.A7, it is apparently clear that the impugned cheque issued in favour of the Electricity Board was returned dishonoured evenafter the complainant is having sufficient balance in the Savings Bank Account to the tune of Rs.55,674/- as per Ex.A4 in the 1^st opposite party bank.

9.     The contention of the 3^rd opposite party is that in due response to the complainant’s letter dated:01.02.2016, the 3^rd opposite party confirmed the fact of dishonour of the impugned cheque by the 1^st opposite party with the reason “Funds Insufficient”.  On 08.02.2016, the 3^rd opposite party sent Ex.B2, letter confirming  the said fact also.   Further the contention of the 3^rd opposite party is that they are the only collecting banker for the Electricity Board and the impugned cheque bearing No.466148 dated:30.12.2016 for Rs.14,376/- in favour of the Electricity Board was sent for clearance to the 1^st opposite party bank which is the complainant’s bank.   The 1^st opposite party bank was returned the cheque by dishonouring with an endorsement made as ‘Insufficient Fund’ by the 1^st opposite party. The 3^rd opposite party on 08.02.2016, as per Ex.B2 enclosed the copy of return memo and copy of cheque image extracted from RBI website  proves that the return of cheque with an endorsement of ‘insufficient fund’ by the 1^st opposite party.   Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the 3^rd opposite party and the 3^rd opposite party is not liable for payment of any compensation.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 & 2 shall pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The  opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.    The complaint as against the 3^rd opposite party is hereby dismissed.

The above  amounts shall be payable  within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 22^nd day of January 2019. 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT

 

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1		Copy of Electricity Meter Card
Ex.A2	13.01.2016	Copy of receipt issued by TNEB
Ex.A3	13.01.2016	Copy of Demand Draft Challan
Ex.A4		Copy of Bank Pass Book
Ex.A5	30.12.2015	Copy of returned cheque received by the complainant from the 3rd opposite party
Ex.A6	19.01.2016	Copy of letter from the complainant to the 1st opposite party
Ex.A7	21.01.2016	Copy of reply from the 1st opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A8	25.01.2016	Copy of letter from the complainant to 1st opposite party
Ex.A9	01.02.2016	Copy of letter from the complainant to 2nd opposite party
Ex.A10	08.02.2016	Copy of letter from the 3rd opposite party to the complainant enclosing a copy of the returned cheque with return memo
Ex.A11	23.03.2016	Copy of letter from the complainant to 2nd opposite party
Ex.A12	15.02.2016	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant to the opposite party with acknowledgement card

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES 1 & 2 SIDE DOCUMENTS:-  NIL

3^RD OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:- 

Ex.B1	04.01.2016	Copy of cheque image extracted from RBI Website
Ex.B2	08.02.2016	Copy of letter from the 3rd opposite party to the complainant with return memo

 

 

MEMBER-I                           MEMBER-II                     PRESIDENT