BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 109 of 2015
Date of Institution: 4.6.2015
Date of Decision: 31.1.2017
Murli Dhar son of Sh. Pawan Kumar, resident of 416, Bhagat Singh Colony, Barnala Road, Sirsa, Tehsil and District Sirsa.
………Complainant.
Versus
Punjab National Bank, Branch Barnala Road, Sirsa, through its Branch Manager.
……… Opposite party.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL ……MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Rahul Sharma, Advoate for complainant.
Sh.S.L.Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
The case of the complainant is that he is a consumer of the op-bank and holds a saving bank account bearing No.4155000100137623 and has been making transactions. The complainant issued three cheques in favour of ‘Escrow Account-VRL IPO-R” of the amount of Rs.13,325/- each on 15.4.2015. The two cheques bearing No.560010 and 560011 were encashed but one cheque bearing No.560008 was dishonored by op-bank without any reasonable cause whereas at the time of presenting the said cheque, balance of Rs.18,755.69/- was in the account of complainant after encashment of above said two cheques. Had the op-bank honored the above said third cheque on the same date, then balance of Rs.5,430.69/- would have remained but the op did not do so. The complainant had to face degradations of his reputation due to deficiency of the service of the op-bank without any fault of complainant. The complainant immediately contacted with the op and got checked his balance from the branch and was stunned to see that there was balance of Rs.18,755.69/- in his account till 20.4.2015, which clearly shows that the op has dishonored the said cheque without any reasonable cause. It is further averred that due to such act and conduct of op, dealings between the complainant and said company has been affected and op has defamed the complainant before the said company. The complainant has suffered loss due to dishonor of cheque because he has purchased the shares from the said company within limitation of fixed date, in which the complainant presented the said cheque but due to non payment to the said company the purpose of earning amount by complainant became unsuccessful. The complainant is entitled to damages for mental torture, harassment etc. The complainant sent a legal notice on 2.5.2015 to op advising the op either to tender its unconditional apology or to pay an amount of Rs.five lacs on account of damages but to no effect. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version to the effect that complainant opened the saving bank account with the op on 17.6.2010. However, due to some computer error in the computer system, the specimen signature of one “Ista” was scanned in the said account of complainant. The op-bank on coming to know of this system error approached the complainant and requested him to visit the branch office of op-bank and to give his specimen signature, so that the above mistake may be rectified but the complainant did not co-operate the op-bank in this regard. Two cheques were encashed by the bank but the third cheque came before the officer of the bank to whom complainant was not known personally, therefore, since the signature of complainant did not match with his specimen signature appearing in the computer system of the bank as the complainant failed to get corrected the same despite repeated requests made to him, so the third cheque was dishonored by the officer of the bank. The Branch Manager of op-bank intimated the complainant in this regard and requested him to get his signature corrected in his account. Then the complainant turned up and visited the branch office of the bank on 24.3.2016 and gave his specimen signature and then the same were appended to his saving bank account. If the complainant would have cooperated the bank whenever he was called by the branch manager to get corrected his specimen signature in the system of the bank, the above cheque would not have been dishonored. The officer of the bank acted in good faith in the interest of bank. Remaining contents of the complaint have been denied.
3. In evidence, complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1/A, copies of cheques Ex.C1/B to Ex.C1/D, legal notice Ex.C1/E. On the other hand, op tendered affidavit of Sh. Mukesh Mintri, Branch Manager Ex.RW1/A, copy of account of Isha with photo Ex.R1 and copy of account number of complainant with photo Ex.R2.
4. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for complainant produced on file copy of first page of pass book of Ms. Isha and copy of first page of pass book of complainant.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
6. From the above said pleadings of both the parties and documents available on file, it emerges out that this is a simple case of error in the computer system of the op-bank due to which specimen signature of one Ms. Isha were scanned in the account of complainant. This can also be said a human error by the official of the op-bank due to rush of work but cannot at all be said an intentional one. However, there is no evidence on file to prove that complainant has suffered any monetary losses due to mistake on the part of op-bank. But keeping in view the fact that mistake has been rectified only after filing of present complaint, therefore, we partly allow the present complaint and op-bank is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2000/- to the complainant as compensation including litigation expenses to the complainant within a period of one month from today failing which complainant will be entitled to interest @9% per annum from the date of order till actual payment. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:31.1.2017. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
