Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he is an unemployed person and used to earn by private tution and he had his intention to start a business. So, he used to read newspapers daily, particularly the advertisement section of personal loan. Accordingly during reading AndndabazarPatrika daily on 05.05.2010 he found one advertisement “Reen&Lagni” wherefrom he came to learn that through bank loan can be arranged and as per said advertisement and contact no. 8981621101 he contacted and from the other side one person answered expressing his name Deep Dey and he stated that he is engaged in securing loan to Nationalised Bank. But before that some required documents should be submitted such as PAN Card, Voter Id Card, Bank Pass Book etc. and after getting such assurance he handed over all those documents him on 10.05.2013 and he also stated that for loan 4 blank cheques were handed over to him out of that one cheque was signed with remark cancelled bearing No. 853457 but other three cheques were completely blank which leaf nos. 853458, 853459 & 853460.
Thereafter Deep Dey asked the complainant how much amount is required by him as loan and against that complainant expressed his required amount to the extent of Rs. 6 lakhs when Deep Dey stated that amount is very big. So, in his account at least Rs. 2.5 lakhs be kept in the account book of the complainant. But in the account of the complainant there was no such amount and so he arranged such amount from her mother’s account and transferred to his account on 31.05.2010 that is sum of Rs. 2,35,000/-. Thereafter passbook was updated and it was reported to Deep Dey in his mobile number and further Deep Dey assured that on 03.06.2014 complainant shall have to get Rs. 6 lakhs loan through State Bank of India (SBI) Beliagahata Branch and thereafter on 03.06.2014 after updating his passbook he found that from his account Rs. 2,33,000/- has been withdrawn on 01.06.2013 vide cheque No. 853460 ( Rs. 73,000/-) and vide cheque No. 853458 Rs. 1,60,000/-. But those cheques were completely blanks, but how the bank authority permitted them to encash and the matter was reported to bank authority but bank authority did not take any step. Thereafter for one year complainant for redressal went to the bank. But on 23.11.2013 when he went to the SBI, Beliaghata Branch, he updated his passbook where he found that in the said passbook a note stated that Rs. 2,33,000/- had been withdrawn SET HOLD = 2,33,000, 08.10.2013 DELETE HOLD = 2,33,000/- and when the matter was enquired bank authority did not take any step and practically for deficiency and negligent manner of service that incident took place and for which complainant has prayed for redressal and for refund of the said amount with interest and also cost of this case.
On the contrary op/bank by filing written statement submittedthat the complainant had been maintaining a savings bank account bearing No. 30091006070 but complainant never submitted any viable proposal for loan with the op and they are not aware of any broker or middleman through whom the complainant was trying to avail of nay financial assistance from the op’s branch and further op’s agreement or contract of the complainant with the third partywho have cheated the complainant as alleged.
Further it is submitted that those cheques bearing nos. 853458, 853459 & 853460 alleged to have been encashed through the S.B. Account of the complainant were not presented to the branch of op for payment and aforesaid cheques were passed through some other branch/bank and op is in no way connected with the transactions, although those were simply reflected in his savings account through electronic process and for which op prayed for expunging their name from the complaint and dismissal of this case.
Further it is submitted that the remark Set Hold and Delete Hold are the routine affairs of the clearing system to which the paying banker have nothing to do. So question of deficiency of service on the part of the op does not arise and further submitted that op simply being a paying banker had or have no responsibility with the alleged transactions. So, the present complaint should be dismissed.
Decision with reasons
On careful consideration of the entire materials on record and also the complaint and written version including the document, it is clear that op/bank has not stated about the genuinity of the cheque which has been encashed. But it is a fact that op has not stated that signatures of those cheques which were encahsed by some unknown person as alleged by the complainant of the signature of the complainant and op has notanywhere asserted that the signature as found on the cheques are signature of the complainant. But complainant very specifically submitted that he handed over 3 cheques out of which two cheques were encahsed and in respect of that practically op has stated nothing only trying to say that it was cleared from clearing house that is by another bank only it is showndeducted from the account of the complainant as per electronic process and therefore op has no liability.
So, considering the above written version it is clear that op has not challenged the allegation of the complainant that in those cheques complainant never signed. Then invariably it was/is duty of the op to prove that in those cheques the signatures are of the complainant, but that has not been proved by the op. But anyhow it is clear that already complainant has filed a complaint before the Beliaghata Police Station being P.S. Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013 u/s 420/120B/467/471 of IPC and in that case SBI Beliaghata Branch was directed to submit all documents and transactions in respect of withdrawal against SBI A/C No. 853458 and 853460 having amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- and Rs. 70,000/- respectively. Against SBI A/C No. 30091006070. So, it is clear that it is under investigation whether in those cheques’ signatures in the name of the complainant were of the complainant or some unknown person and if police submits any report regarding those question documents and from the report it would be found that signatures as found in the cheques are not of the complainant in that case op/Bank is bound to refund the said amount along with bank interest from the date of its encashment.
Peculiar factor is that Bank is very silent in this regard and as if they have their no liability. So, they are not interested in the said case and in the above situation we are confirmed that the final police report of the question documents by the handwriting expert of the CID Department will decide the fate of the complaint and in that case invariably op shall have no objection and fact remains that at the time of advancement of the argument by the Ld. Lawyer for the op such an argument was advancedthat till receipt of the handwriting expert report it is not possible for the bank to decide this dispute.
Considering all the above fact we are convinced to hold that the dispute shall be finally disposed of by the Bank on receipt of the handwriting expert report from the CID Department in connection with the Beliaghata Police Station being Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013. Accordingly we are disposing of this complaint directing the Bank Authority to dispose of the claim of the complainant after final receipt of the handwriting expert report of the CID Department, West Bengal in respect of question document in connection with the Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013.
Accordingly the case is disposed of with such direction finally.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
That the case and same is allowed on contest without any cost at this stage against the op.
Op is directed to handover the entire amount of the aforesaid two questioned cheques i.e. total Rs. 2,33,000/- along with interest calculating from the date of encashment of the same from the account of the complainant and till its full payment only when the report of the hand writing expert of CID Department of West Bengal shall be received by the op/Bank and if report of the hand writing expert question document, CID is found in favour of the complainant, in that case, op shall have to comply the order. But if it is found that if it is against the complainant’s claim, in that case, op has no liability. But invariably op shall act very devotedly for disposal of this matter to take all such steps to collect such report from Beliaghata Police Station in connection with Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013 by filing such prayer before the Ld. ACJM, Sealdah.
The Police Commissioner, Kolkata is requested to take up Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013 u/s 420/120B/467/468/471 IPC very seriously and to take all such steps to collect final report of hand writing expert of CID, West Bengal and a copy of the final report of questioned document issued by hand writing expert of CID shall be sent to the Branch Manager of SBI, Beliaghata Branch forthwith and a compliance report also should be sent to this Forum by the Police Commissioner, Kolkata.
The matter is extremely urgent so the Police Commissioner shall keep proper watch for clearing hand writing expert report immediately and in this regard Police Commissioner, Kolkata shall take all such step and comply the order of this Forum immediately also for disposal of the investigation of Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 181 dated 03.06.2013.
Parties of this case shall be guided by this final order and even after receipt of final report of the hand writing expert in respect of questioned document by the op/Bank, op/Bank does not act as per order in that case complainant shall have to file execution case before this Forum for execution of that order if it is found that hand writing expert report has supported the allegation of the complainant.
