DATE OF FILING                    :     22/05/2014

DATE OF S/R                            :      17/07/2014

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     04/12/2014

RAMJI PANDEY

son of  late  Durgapandey ,

Sukanto Place 3^rd Bye lane, Dakshin Baxarah,

P.O. Dakshin Para, P.S. Santragachi

District –Howrah,

West Bengal………………………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.

• Versus -

   

  The Bank Manager,

  State Bank of India,

  Esplanade Branch 98, Esplanade East

  Kolkata 700 069………………………………….…………………OPPOSITE PARTY.

   

                                                  P   R    E     S    E    N     T

   

  President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

  Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

  Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

   

                                                   F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

  1. Complainant, Ramji Pandey,by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to refund the balance amount of Rs. 35,000/-, to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation alongwith interest as per bank rate on Rs. 1,47,500/- till 25/02/2014 along with other order or orders as theForum may deem fit and proper.
  2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant deposited one A/c payee cheque dated 21/11/2013 amounting to Rs 1,47,500/- with the O.P., Bank where he maintains one S/B A/c being No.10869756656. He got that cheque from C.T.C Co-Operative Society towards a loan required for his daughter’s marriage. Unfortunately,after depositing the said cheque with the O.P., he came to know that the amount of the said cheque was credited to someone else, namely, M.S. Halim. So, he gave two lawyers notice dated 21/12/2013 and 10/04/2014 to O.P. requesting them to refund his total amount of Rs. 1,47,500/-. AlthoughO.P. paid Rs. 1,12,500/- to the complaint on 25/02/2014, Rs. 35000/- is yet to be paid by the O.P. till date. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant case praying for the aforesaid relief.
  3. Notice was served upon O.p. O.p. neither appeared and nor filed written version. So the case was heard ex parte against o.p.
  4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

1.  Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  ?
2. Whether the complainant isentitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

1. DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

   5. Both the points aretaken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the petition of complaint and its annexures. Although the o.p. has not filed W/V, it is very much clear from the letter dated 31-12-2013 written by o.p. to the complainant that the amount of Rs. 1,47,500/- which was deposited by the complainant, was actually credited to someone else, namely Saiful Halim. It means o.p. has realized andacknowledged their fault in this respect. Now it has been difficult to realize for us why o.p. has not given the rest amount of Rs. 35,000/- till the filing of this case on 22-05-2014. Complainant has repeatedly requested the o.p. to give his rest amount of Rs. 35,000/- but o.p. paid no heed to that. Complainant deposited the cheque on 21-11-2013 and o.p. paid Rs. 1,12,500/- only on 25-02-2014 which means after three months complainant got his a part of his legitimate amount of encashment of the cheque in question when he was in need of that amount in November, 2014 on account of his daughter’s marriage, he could not utilize the same. For which he had to face tremendous crisis which a man of common prudence canbetter understand. Moreover, even after receiving the notice of this Forum o.p. did not bother to appear before this Forum. No W/Vhas even been filed by them. Accordingly the allegations of the complainantmade out against the o.p. remained unchallenged and uncontroverted and we have no difficulty to believe the unchallenged testimony of the complainant. Accordingly we find o.p. to be deficient in providing service. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 298  of 2014 ( HDF 298 of 2014 )  be  allowed ex parte  with  costs  against  the O.P.  

      That the  O.P. is directed to pay Rs. 35,000/-  to the complainant.

       That the  O.P. is  further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/-  as litigation costs.

      That the o.p. is further directed to pay the entire amount of Rs. 42,000/- to the complainant  within one month from the date of this order i.d., the aforesaid  amount shall carry an interest @ 10% per annum till full realization.      

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.            

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                   

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.