C.F. CASE No. : CC/11/75
COMPLAINANT : Tanmoy Thakur,
S/o Anal Prasad Thakur,
A.K. Dey Road,
Mallickpara,
P.O. Krishnagar,
P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Nadia
OPPOSITE PARTY/OP : The Branch Manager / In-Charge
AXIS Bank,
Krishnagar Branch
44, M.M. Ghosh Street (1st Floor)
P.O. Krishnagar, P.S. Kotwali,
Dist. Nadia
PRESENT : SHRI KANAILAL CHAKRABORTY PRESIDENT
: SHRI SHYAMLAL SUKUL MEMBER
DATE OF DELIVERY
OF JUDGMENT : 30th January, 2012
: J U D G M E N T :
In brief, the case of the complainant is that he has a SB account with the OP, AXIS Bank, Krishnagar Branch. It is his further case that on 26.12.07 he deposited a cheque issued on IDBI in his name for amounting Rs. 10,442/- by his company before the OP for encashment and credited at his account. But till today the cheque amount is not credited in his account though he contacted with the OP several times to know about the position of that cheque. But no reply was given to him. After lapse of a long period on 20.07.11 the OP bank intimated him by sending a letter to the effect that he had not received the proceedings of that cheque from the respected bank’s branch (IDBI) as a result of which he was unable to give the clearance of that cheque. He also informed that the age of the cheque had already crossed six months and the same became stale instrument. Thereafter, on 26.07.11 the complainant sent a letter to the OP bank requesting him to take necessary step for encashment of the cheque and to intimate him effective result within 15 days. But no reply was sent to him till to-date by the OP bank. Due to negligence of the OP bank his cheque was not encashed and credited to his account. So having no other alternative he has filed this case praying for the reliefs as stated in the petition of complaint.
The OP has filed a written version in this case, inter alia, stating that the case is not maintainable in its present form and nature and it is barred by limitation also. It is his submission that the complainant has not produced any deposit slip in support of depositing the cheque in his SB account lying with the OP, though it is his case that he deposited the cheque on 26.12.07 for encashment. Besides this, the IDBI never informed the OP about the status of the cheque. As the IDBI bank did not inform him about the status of the cheque, so it is not possible for him to give the clearance of the cheque. Therefore, this complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the same is liable to be dismissed against him.
POINTS FOR DECISION
Point No.1: Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
Point No.2: Is the case barred by limitation?
Point No.3: Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
All the points are taken up together for discussion as they are interrelated and for the sake of convenience.
On a careful perusal of the petition of complaint along with the annexed documents and the written version filed by the OP and the oral evidence supplied by the complainant and also after hearing the arguments advanced by the ld. lawyers for the parties it is available on record that this complainant deposited a cheque No. 932020 of IDBI bank for Rs. 10,442/- with the OP bank for encashment and credited in his account on 26.12.07. But till today the same is not collected and credited to his account by the OP bank. From the ‘Annexure – A’, it is available that the OP bank intimated the complainant on 20.07.11, inter alia, stating that the complainant deposited a cheque with him for collection, but till date he has not received the proceedings from the respective bank’s branch as a result of which he is unable to give him the clearance of that cheque. Besides this, in due course the age of the cheque has crossed six months and still the amounts are lying outstanding in their books and it has become stale instrument also. He has advised the complainant to contact with the drawee of the cheque for recollection and to contact them within 7 days of this letter. Accordingly, the complainant sent a letter to this OP bank vide ‘Annexure – B’ on 26.07.11 claiming to pay him the cheque amount along with interest as it became stale instrument due to fault of the OP bank as well as it was dishonoured. Against that letter no reply was sent by the OP bank. OP has not filed any document in support of his contention whether he contacted with drawee bank regarding the whereabouts of the cheque. He has not denied that the complainant never contacted with him prior to 20.07.11, rather after a gap of three and a half years he intimated the complainant that the cheque was not cleared by the drawee bank and it became stale instrument due to lapse of 6 monhs. In the letter he has also intimated that the cheque was dishonoured. But nothing is stated why the cheque was dishonoured by the drawee bank. It was his duty to collect information from the drawee bank about the fate of the cheque which he sent to the drawee bank for clearance. On this point, we find gross deficiency in service on the part of the OP who neither contacted with drawee bank nor with the complainant for intimating him about the fate of the cheque deposited by the complainant for encashment on 26.12.07. It is also established that due to his negligence the cheque was not encashed in due time and it was not credited to the account of the complainant lying with him. So the complainant suffered from enjoying the cheque amount which belonged to him.
Regarding limitation nothing is agitated by the ld. lawyer for the OP at the time of argument, but the fact is that admittedly the cheque was deposited before the OP on 26.12.07. The intimation was given by the OP to this complainant on 20.07.11 in writing to the effect that he did not receive the proceedings of the cheque from the respective bank, as a result of which he was unable to give any clearance of that cheque. So we have no hesitation to hold that the cause of action arose on and from that date, i.e., on 20.07.11. The complainant sent a letter to the OP as per the ‘Annexure – A’ dtd. 20.07.11 asking him to pay the cheque amount. But the OP did not send any reply to that letter. Thereafter, the present case was filed on 08.09.11.
Therefore, in view of the above discussions our considered view is that the case was filed within limitation period as the cause of action arose on and from 20.07.11. We do also hold that the complainant has become able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the OP in this case. In result the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered,
That the case, CC/11/75 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP. The complainant is entitled to get the cheque amount of Rs. 10,442/- along with compensation of Rs. 2,000/- for harassment caused to him and Rs. 1,000/- as litigation cost, i.e., in total Rs. 13,442/-. The OP is directed to make payment of the decretal amount of Rs. 13,442/- to this complainant within a period of one month since this date of passing this judgment, in default, the decretal amount will carry interest @10% per annum since this date till the date of realization of the full amount.
Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.
