BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.94 of 2017

      Date of Instt. 03.04.2017

      Date of Decision:12.02.2020

Parmod Chander aged 56 years son of Sh. Satpal resident of Mohalla Chaudriya, Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Phillaur Branch through its Branch Manager/Incharge etc.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Sh. Karnail Singh           (President)

Smt. Jyotsna                   (Member)

Present:       None for the Complainant.

Sh. Ashish Bhandari, Adv. Counsel for the OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that        the complainant is having a saving bank account No.06472151000958 with the OP, who is offering its services under the banking business activities throughout India including the complainant and as such, the complainant is a consumer with the OP. The complainant had to pay an amount of Rs.4,70,000/- to his near relative Joginder Pal son of Tirath Ram R/o Phagwara and in this regard, his above said relative met him on 12/13.09.2016 at Phillaur and he demanded the above said amount from him and the complainant assured to Joginder Pal that he is going to receive some bank transfers in his bank account maintained in the branch of the OP, very soon and when the complainant will receive the funds, he will issue the cheque in his favour for repayment. The above said Joginder Pal requested the complainant to issue the cheque of Rs.4,70,000/- and he further told him not to fill the name of the holder of the cheque as he wanted to withdraw the amount either in his name or in the name of his son from the bank and accordingly, the complainant filled the columns of amount and signed the cheque and subsequently, put the said cheque in his pocket for giving the said cheque to Joginder Pal. On 15.09.2016 when the complainant was going from Phillaur to Phagwara, he misplaced the sais cheque within the area of Phillaur as the cheque had fallen from his pocket somewhere and he could not traced the said cheque inspite of his best efforts. Therefore, the complainant immediately intimated to the OP on 15.09.2016 with regard to misplace of his above said cheque bearing No.832511 from bank account No.06472151000958 and requested to stop the payment of above said cheque due to said reason and the said letter was duly received by the bank authorities on the same day with their endorsement. The OP also deducted an amount of Rs.50/- towards the facilitation charges of stop payment of the said cheque and subsequently, the complainant was advised by the OP also that in order to avoid any misuse of the said cheque, he should also intimate to the police authorities and thereafter, the complainant intimated to the police authorities and DDR No.1296970 dated 29.09.2016 was also got registered with the police station Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar by the complainant.

2.                That in the month of January 2017, the complainant and his family members received a message from the Police Station that Dinesh Chander son of Tarsem Lal resident of Old Tehsil Road, Phillaur has given a complaint against the complainant and his family members with regard to the dishonor of the above said cheque in his favour with the remarks ‘Funds Insufficient’ vide memo dated 30.11.2016 and 26.09.2016 with the same remarks. The above said cheque has been misused by Dinesh Chander and he has made a complaint to the police in order to blackmail and to extract money from the complainant and he has now filed a false and frivolous case before the Court at Phillaur and he is demanding money under the garb of false litigation. In this regard, the complainant has received the summons from the police authorities and now he has to receive the notices and summons from the Court with regard to litigation, which was the prime duty of the OP to protect him as the complainant had intimated to the bank authorities well within time and had shown his apprehension that the said cheque can be misused by any person and in order to avoid any misuse, the complainant gave the intimation to the OP well within time. Due to the above said reason, the complainant has been harassed and humiliated due to the negligence, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service of the OP. Moreover it was bounded duty of the bank to intimate to the complainant with regard to any misuse so that he would have informed to the police well before against the person, who has misused the aforesaid cheque. Hence, the present complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- on account of damages to the complainant and further, OP be directed to pay compensation for causing harassment to the complainant as well as unfair trade practice, to the tune of Rs.2,00,000/- and be also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.20,000/-.

3.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared through its counsel and filed a written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that present complaint is not maintainable in this Forum and further averred that the present complaint is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties. The complainant has not impleaded the alleged Joginder Pal and holder of the cheque Sh. Dinesh Chander in the complaint, who were necessary parties, therefore, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further alleged that the matter is very technical in nature which requires thorough evidence, therefore, the complaint can be decided only by the Civil Court. It is further averred that the matter is already been sub-judice before the Court of Illaqa Magistrate as the drawee Sh. Dinesh Chander son of Sh. Tarsem Lal has already filed complaint u/s 138 of the NI Act which is still pending, therefore, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint. It is further alleged by the OP that the complainant has suppressed and concealed the material facts from the Forum and further submitted that the complainant himself had issued signed cheque, therefore, he cannot take benefit of his own wrongs.         On merits, the factum in regard to saving bank account of the complainant in the bank of the OP is not disputed fact and it is also admitted that the complainant has made request for stop payment, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

4.                Replication not filed by the complainant.

5.                In order to prove the case of the complainant, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence.

6.                Similarly, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OPA and closed the evidence.

7.                We have heard the argument from learned counsel for the OP as none has appeared on behalf of the complainant and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8.                Without accepting the alleged plea of the complainant that his cheque was lost because the matter regarding dishonor of the cheque is already pending before the Criminal Court for adjudication and the matter in regard to theft of the cheque and dishonor of the cheque for want of insufficient amount is within the sphere of the Criminal Court and that aspects is not to be considered and decided by the Criminal Court.

9.                Now, we have to only analyze whether there is any negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Admittedly, the complainant is having saving bank account No.06472151000958 in the bank of the OP and one cheque bearing No.832511 was presented for encashment by one Dinesh Chander son of Tarsem Lal and the said cheque was returned back by the OP Bank with a remarks ‘Funds Insufficient’, vide memo dated 30.11.2016 and 26.09.2016 with the same remarks. It is clear that the payment so got stopped by the complainant qua cheuqe No.832511 has not been cleared by the bank on either way for want of insufficient fund or stop payment. If the bank releases the payment in favour of the drawee Dinesh Chander, then we can say that there is a negligence and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP bank. We further considered the submission of the OP that the bank has not informed to the complainant regarding presentation of cheque by one Dinesh Chander, but if we go through the request for stop payment Ex.C-1, in that application, the complainant has make only one request stop the payment of the cheque, nowhere make a request to inform the complainant if the said cheque is to be presented by any one. So, not giving information regarding submission of cheque for encashment is not covered under the shadow of deficiency in service. We have also considered that the bank has not made any wrong endorsement in the memo dated 30.11.2016 and 26.09.2016 qua funds insufficient because the statement of account Ex.C-4 itself show that on 15.09.2016 to 02.12.2016, there is no fund at least in the account of the complainant more than Rs.1343/-. So, from all angles, we do not find any deficiency and negligence on the part of the OP. However, the complainant has right to take such like plea before the Criminal Court, if he desire. Now accordingly, this complaint is without merits and the same is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

10.              Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated                                       Jyotsna                           Karnail Singh

12.02.2020                                        Member                          President