OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANGUL
PRESENT:- SRI DURGA CHARAN MISHRA.
PRESIDENT
A N D
Smt.Sunanda Mallick &
Sri K.K.Mohanty,MEMBERS .
Consumer Complaint No. 30 of 2014
Date of Filling : -04.04.2014.
Date of Order :- 20.09.2019.
Laxmi Kanta Tripathy,S/O.Late Bisnu Ch.Tripathy.
At-Malati Vihar,P.O.Hakimpada,Dist.Angul.Odisha.
_____________________________________Complainant.
Vrs.
- Post Master ,Angul Head Post Office,
At/P.O/Dist.Angul, Odisha.
- Superintendent of Post,Dhenkanal Circle, At/P.O/Dist.Dhenkanal,Odisha
- Branch Manager,Canara Bank,Angul Branch, Amalapada,5th Line,P.O/P.S/Dist.Angul
For the complainant :- Sri B.C.Pradhan & associates(Advs.)
For the opp.party No.1 :- Sri S.K.Satapathy,(Authorised Person)
For the opp.party No.2 :- Trinath Sahoo ,(Authorised Person)
For the opp.party No.3 :- Sri P.K.Bhutia & associates(Advs.)
: J U D G E M E N T :
Sri K.K.Mohanty,Member.
The complainant has filed this case with prayer to direct the opp.parties to pay Rs. 203.00 with 8% interest per annum with compensation and litigation charges.
2. The petitioner’s case runs thus :-
The petitioner had purchased one Kishan Bikash Patra . On maturity dt. 24.10.2013 the opp.party No.1 issued cheque No. 511151 dt. 24.10.13 for Rs. 1,00,000.00 to be drawn at SBI,Angul main branch . The petitioner deposited the same cheque in Canara Bank,Angul branch for collection.The SBI,Angul branch did not honour the cheque and returned with reason that alteration required full signature(Name). There was a small error in the name. The opp.parties corrected the name but did not put full signature on alteration.
That, due to negligent act of opp.party No.1, the complainant’s bank (opp.party No.3) deducted Rs. 150.00 + Rs.19.00 as bank charges. As a result of such deduction, the balance reduced under minimum balance of account and therefore the bank again charged penalty of Rs. 30.00 + Rs. 4.00 for not maintaining minimum balance. The complainant suffered total financial loss of Rs. 203.00 .
3. The opp.parties have contested the case and submitted that they have not neglected the petitioner in any manner. The opp.parties further clarified that the Bank authority unnecessarily misinterpreted the payee’s name and returned the cheque.
4. It is alleged by the complainant that opp. Party No.3 Bank, i.e the banker of the complainant illegally deducted Rs. 169.00 towards bank charges for which the balance reduced below the minimum balance and for that reason opp.party No.3 deducted penalty of Rs. 34.00 from his account. Opp.party No.1 had issued the cheque to be drawn in SBI, Angul branch . As the complainant placed the cheque before opp.party No.3 for collection and opp.party No.3 spared its time and manpower for collecting the cheque amount but as the cheque was defective the SBI returned the cheque. Therefore, opp.party No.3 has not made any deficit in rendering service. Rather the deficit in service can be attributed to SBI,Angul branch but it is not a party.So no order can be passed against, SBI,Angul branch.Since opp.party No.3 has spent time and man power , it cannot be penalized for deducting charges.
5. The real question is whether opp.party No.1 & 2 had issued a correct cheque to be drawn in SBI,Angul branch or not. The Xerox copy of the impugned cheque has been filed by the complainant which was returned to him by opp.party No.3 (Canara Bank ). The complainant pleads that the letter small “n” was not written in the word “Laxmikanta” but subsequently it has been added by opp.party No.1 when the complainant submitted it before him for issuance of a fresh cheque . Though this is a summery procedure enquiry but ordinarily the principles of CPC are to be followed. In Civil cases the principle of “preponderance of probabilities factor” plays an important role in this type of case. On careful looking it is found that the letter small “n” in word Laxmikanta has not been written in the same line with other letters and no space has been given prior or subsequent to the letter “n”. Thus strong presumption can be drawn that when the cheque was returned to the complainant by Canara Bank (opp.party No.3), he went to the Post Office with the returned cheque where the postal authority (opp.party No.1) corrected the word ‘Laxmikanta” by writing the letter “n” without giving any space near it which is clearly visible to naked eye . Thus, strong presumption is drawn against opp.party Nos. 1 & 2 and as it is unrebutted it becomes proof .Further the S.B.I,Angul branch returned the cheque as defective. So opp.party Nos. 1 & 2 are liable for causing deficit in rendering service to the complainant for which the complainant suffered with mental agony and harassment and lost total cash of Rs. 203.00 only. Therefore, opp.party Nos. 1 & 2 shall refund the cash to the complainant and pay compensation of Rs. 2,000.00 for mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000.00 towards cost of litigation.
6. Hence the order :-
: O R D E R :
The case is disposed of on contest against all the opp.parties but opp.party No.3 is not liable to pay anything to the complainant in this case. Opp.party No.1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable and shall pay Rs. 203.00 (Rupees Two Hundred Three) towards loss, Rs. 2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand) towards mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000.00 (Rupees Two Thousand) towards litigation cost to the complainant within 30 days of getting this order. It is made clear that in case of any deviation of this order, the opp.party No.1 & 2 shall pay 14% quarterly compoundable interest on the awarded amount of Rs. 4203.00 (Rupees Four Thousand Two Hundred Three) from the 31st day of this order till actual payment is made besides other penalties prescribed in the C.P.Act.
Order delivered in the open forum today the 20th September,2019 with hand and seal of this Forum.
Typed to my dictation
and corrected by me Sd/-
(Sri D. C. Mishra)
Sd/- President.
(Sri K.K.Mohanty )
Member. Sd/-
(Smt.S.Mallick),
Member.
