Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/05/2015

C.Baboo Joseph, Former-Trustee Finance,Madras mar Troma Syrian Church, - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI, By its Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

V.party in person

02 Jan 2019

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  23.12.2014

                                                                Order pronounced on:  02.01.2019

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT:  TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL - PRESIDENT

 

TMT.P.V.JEYANTHI B.A., MEMBER - I

 

WEDNESDAY  THE 02^nd  DAY OF JANUARY 2019

 

C.C.NO.05/2015

 

C.Baboo Joseph,

Former - Trustee  Finance,

Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church,

Old #: 18C, First Street,

Bharathi Road Perambur,

Chennai – 11.

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

State Bank of Hyderabad,

By its Manager,

16^th Avenue Harrington Road,

Chetpet Chennai – 31.

.....Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 06.01.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : Party in Person

 

Counsel for Opposite Party                      : M/s.B.B.Sendhilkumar, P.Lalithapriya,

                                                                    B.Nanda Kumar

 

 

 

 

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT TMT.K.LAKSHMIKANTHAM, B.Sc., B.L., DTL.,DCL, DL & AL

          This complaint is filed by the complainant  to direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service     for floating banking rules and giving payment on altered cheque, and also to pay a sum of 2,00,000/- towards the mental agony, and  pain caused by such deficiency in service  with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant is the elected Trustee (Finance) of Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church, Chennai-31 for the year 2013-2014. One Mr.P.J.John is the trustee (Accounts). The administration and activities of the Church are governed by their written constitution. All accounts are only done  jointly by both the trustees (i.e. Finance and accounts).  The Church had an S.B. Account with the opposite party, operated by both the trustees jointly. A Crossed account payee  Cheque  bearing #:478330 dated 15.06.2013 for Rs.1,000/- was issued from the said account to one Mrs. Elizabeth  Varghese . The said cheque was altered wherein crossing was cancelled and payee’s name was changed from Elizabeth Varghese to Elizabeth Mathew by Mr. P.J. John, one of the signatory. The opposite party  had paid the amount across the counter to one Mrs.Shantha Varghese. When complained by the complainant , the opposite party  had failed to act upon the complaint hence there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

 

2. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

          The Complainant has ceased the office of the Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church, not authorized to file the complaint. S.B. Account is maintained by the Church and the cheque was presented which is signed by one of the trustee. In good faith, opposite party  paid the cheque amount. The matter was referred to the church and was closed. There is no deficiency on the part of the opposite party  since the matter was closed as per letter dated 31.01.2014. There is no cause of action and the complaint is to be dismissed.

          3. No written arguments  and oral arguments on the side of opposite party.

4. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

5. POINT NO :1 

          The complaint is filed by the complainant in the capacity of former Trustee of (Finance) of Madras Mar Thoma  Syrian  Church. The church maintains the account in the opposite party  bank and account  payee cheque  for Rs.1,000/-was issued  to one Mrs. Elizabeth Mathew signed by the authorized signatory/ trustee, presented by one Mrs. ShanthaVerghese, the amount was paid to her are all admitted facts. Ex.A1 and Ex.A3  are the copies of the e-mail dated 26.12.2013 sent by  the opposite party  to the complainant. Ex.A2 is the letter from the ombudsman and Ex.A4 is  copy of the constitution page 92 & 93.Ex.A5 Form-E of deed of consent to be executed by the trustees of the parish. On the side of the opposite party  Ex.B1, the  letter address by Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church  to the Branch Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad (opposite party ) is submitted.

         6. The complainant is the Ex-Trustee of the Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church and the account in opposite party’s bank is jointly operated by Trustees (Finance,Accounts).    Admittedly, a crossed, account payee cheque  for Rs.1,000/- was issued from the said account to one Mrs. Elizabeth Varghese. The cheque was subsequently altered by cancelling the crossing and changing the  payee’s name from Elizabeth Varghese to Elizabeth Mathew  by one of the signatories. But the opposite party  had paid the amount across the counter to one Mrs. Shantha  Varghese. The complainant contends that the opposite party  cannot pass the corrected cheques which amounts to deficiency in service.  Hence he has to be compensated for the same.

           7. The complaint is protested by the opposite party  stating that the cheque was signed by one of the signatory, in good faith, the cheque was honoured and the signature of the said Mrs. Shantha Varghese was obtained at the back of the cheque and money was disbursed. Admittedly the said person is the accountant of the church and  had 17 years service  in the church . However, the church had sent a communication to treat the matter as closed. According to the opposite party,  (bank) the complainant is not representing the church and he was not the trustee at the time of filing this complaint and there is no cause of action. Therefore the complaint is to be dismissed.

           8. Ex.A1 and Ex.A3 are one and the same and it is the e-mail copy sent by opposite party  to the complainant. The incidence of cancellation of crossing (i.e. account  payee) and the signature of the accountant who went to encash the cheque was obtained at the back of the cheque  and disbursal of the amount are admitted facts. The complainant has not obtained any permission from the church to file the complaint. Neither he was holding any position at the time of filing the complaint, nor has he filed the complaint on behalf of the church. Admittedly Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church is the customer of the bank and the complainant as such is not authorized by the church and also he has ceased the office of the trustee of the said church and there is no cause of action for the complainant to file the complaint. Ex.B1 also indicates that the matter regarding the subject of the complaint was closed by the church and then  it was informed to the opposite party  on 31.01.2014 itself and the President and the Trustees have signed  in the letter head of the church. Once the subject matter of the complaint has already been closed by the church,  the complaint filed by the complainant  fails and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from the opposite party.

09.POINT NO :2

Since the matter in dispute has already been closed by the church, and has already been discussed by as in point No.1 regarding the position of the complainant ,  the complainant is not entitled for any relief and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 02^nd  day of January 2019.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 26.12.2013                   Opposite party’ e-mail

Ex.A2 dated 08.04.2014                   Ombudsman’s letter

Ex.A3 dated 26.12.2013                   Copy of the e-mail dated 26.12.2013 from State

                                                    Bank of Hyderabad, Chetpet, Chennai – 31.

 

Ex.A4 dated NIL                     Constitution of Marthoma Syrian Church of

                                                    Malabar, Section – 361 & 364

 

Ex.A5 dated NIL                     Deed  consent to be executed by the Trustees of

                                                    the Parish

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

 

Ex.B1 dated 31.01.2014                   Letter from Madras Mar Thoma Syrian Church

 

 

                                               

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT