Punjab

Sangrur

CC/223/2018

Harmandeep Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Mohd. Izhar

05 Apr 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                            

 

                                                                        Complaint No. 223

Instituted on:   07.05.2018

                                                                       Decided on:     05.04.2019

 

Harmandeep Singh son of Kuldeep Singh r/o H.No.181, Captain Karam Singh Nagar, Sunam Road, Sangrur, District Sangrur.

 

                                                        …. Complainant.       

                                         Versus

 

1.     State Bank of India, DC Complex, Sangrur through its Branch Manager, Sangrur.

2.     State Bank of India, Main Branch, Patiala Gate, Sangrur through its Chief Manager, Sangrur.

             ….Opposite parties

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:      Shri Mohd. Izhar, Advocate                          

 

FOR OPP. PARTY No.1              :       Shri Satpal Sharma, Advocate.

 

FOR OPP.PARTY  No.2              :       Exparte.

 

 

Quorum

         

                   Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

                    Manisha, Member

 

ORDER:   

 

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Presiding Member

 

1.             Shri Harmandeep Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the complainant and his wife have a joint saving account bearing number 65219754118 with OP number 1. Further case of the complainant is that on 19.12.2017 the complainant presented cheque number 0233108 dated 19.12.2017 of OBC Bank Sunami Gate, Sangrur for Rs.2,00,000 which was issued by Jagdish Kumar son of Kailash Kumar for deposit in his account with the OP number 1.  The complainant received a message on his mobile number 80540-41777 on 20.12.2017 regarding confirmation of the cheque, which was dishonoured on 22.12.2017. The complainant immediately enquired the matter about the cheque and requested for return of the cheque, but the OP number 1 did not hand over the above said cheque along with memo to the complainant.  Though the complainant visited several times to the OP number 1 for return of the dishonoured  cheque, but all in vain.  The complainant also got served a legal notice dated 23.2.2018 upon the OPs.  The said Jagdish Rai has already issued a new cheque number 033109 in favour of the complainant, but the said cheque has no concern with the old one.  Thus,  alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to return the original cheque or pay Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest to the complainant and further the complainant has claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

2.             In reply filed by OP number 1, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the allegations made in the complaint are outside the scope and ambit of the allegations required under the Consumer Protection Act, that the complaint is bad for mis joinder and non joinder of the parties, that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint and that the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious in nature. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant and his wife are having a joint account, that the complainant presented cheque number 033108 dated 19.12.2017 of OBC Sangrur of Rs.2,00,000/-, but the same was not honored and returned by Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sangrur with remarks “funds insufficient” along with his memo, but the original cheque and memo were lost in bank premises  due to rush of work.   It has been denied that the payment of second cheque number 033109 has no concern with the cheque amount of lost cheque number 033108.

 

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 has produced Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/13 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have given a thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the parties have not produced written arguments. 

 

5.             It is an admitted fact that the complainant is having a joint saving bank account with the OP number 1.  The complainant on 19.12.2017 presented the cheque of Rs.2,00,000/- of Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sangrur issued by Jagdish Rao of Sangrur for its credit in the account of the complainant. The above cheque was not honoured and was returned by OBC Sangrur to the OP with the remarks “funds insufficient” along with the bank memo.  The OP number 1 in its  reply has admitted that the original cheque and its memo lost in the bank premises due to rush of work/audit.  The officials of OP number 1 informed the complainant for the loss of cheque and also informed the person who issued the cheque vide letter dated 5.3.2018 and Jagdish Rao issued a new cheque in favour of the complainant and the OP number 1 stopped the payment of the lost cheque and informed Jagdish Rao vide letter dated 5.3.2018, Ex.OP1/7. Further OP number 1 has submitted that the reason for the loss of cheque in the bank premises was not intentional rather due to rush of work.

 

6.             Though the OP number 1 has categorically admitted that the dishonoured cheque along with the memo was misplaced on account of heavy rush of work/ audit and the cheque was not returned to the complainant, but certainly, there is deficiency in service on the part of OP number 1.

7.             In the sequel of the above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with the directions to OP number 1 to pay to the complainant Rs.10,000/- on account of compensation for harassment and agony and litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.5000/-. The payment of the amounts to be made to the complainant within 45 days of receipt of copy of this order, failing which the complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum on the amount of compensation and litigation expenses.  Copies of the orders be sent to the parties free of cost and there after file be consigned to record room.

                        Pronounced.

                        April 5, 2019.                                    

                                                          (Vinod Kumar Gulati)

                                                             Presiding Member

 

 

 

                                                                (Manisha)

                                                                  Member