Delhi

Central Delhi

CC/637/2008

RAMESH CHAND MEHNDI - Complainant(s)

Versus

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK - Opp.Party(s)

18 Nov 2015

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Execution Application No. CC/637/2008
In
 
1. RAMESH CHAND MEHNDI
R/O B-210 PALAM EXT. PT I. ND 45
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK
EXPRESS BUIDING. BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG ND
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. RAKESH KAPOOR PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. VIKRAM KUMAR DABAS MEMBER
 HON'BLE MRS. NIPUR CHANDNA MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:
For the Respondent:
ORDER

ORDER

SH. RAKESH KAPOOR, PRESIDENT

 

               

 

     We have heard arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the record.

            The facts are not much in dspute .   On 8.3. 2013 the complainant had deposited a paymen voucher for a sum of Rs. 30,000//- with OP1 for collection through OP3.    The proceeds of the voucher were not credited to his account .  The complainant also contacted OP2  who informed the complainant that the voucher had not been received by it.  The complainant had boruhg this fact to the knowledge of OP12  . desite this  the roceeds of the voucher have not been credited to his account till date.    OP1 in its defence  has taken a plea that it had duly sent the payment voucher to Op2 for collection.  It had send several reminders to OP3 in this regard . It had also sent a copy of POD  ( Proof of Delhivery) to O32 .   but still OP2 had failed to sent the proceeds to it.  OP1 has claimed that there is no deficiency of service on its part.     We however, are not impressed with the defense given by OP1 , since the payment voucher was given to OP1 for collection , it was its primary duty to collect its proceeds and pay to the complainant .   The complainant had taken the services of OP21 in this regard and , therefore, the latter was  responsible to the complainant  for the services to be rendered.  The complainant had no privity of contract with oP2 and was not involved  with it in the collection of the proceeds of the voucher.   If OP2 had refused to send the proceeds of the voucher , OP1 was obliged to take legal recourse against it .    Howeve, OP1 could not have brushed aside its liability unde the lea that OP2 had failed to obliged.   We, therefore, hold OP1 deficient in rendering services to the complainant and direct it as under :-

  1. Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 30,000/- along wih interest @ 10% p.a.. from the date of filing this complaint i.e. 12.11.2014 till payment.
  2. Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 10,000/- for apain and agony suffered by him.
  3. Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as cost of litigation.

       

The above amount shall be paid by  the OP to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing which  OP shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of this order till the date of payment. If OP fail to comply with the order within 30 days, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of this order be made available to the parties free of cost as per law and Case File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced in open sitting of the Forum on.....................

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. RAKESH KAPOOR]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. VIKRAM KUMAR DABAS]
MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MRS. NIPUR CHANDNA]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.