For Complainant          :             Sri Chandan Kumar Pattnaik, Advocate..

For Opp. Party               :             Sri Prasant Kumar Patro, Advocate & associates.

                                                                                                     -x-

1.                         The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he is having an SB accounts bearing No.387010100073024 with the OP which is a prime salary account of the complainant.  It is submitted that he purchased an LED TV from M/s. Surya Electronics, Koraput and issued Axis Bank Ch. No.019714 dt.31.03.2018  in favour of M/s. Surya Electronics, Koraput for Rs.55, 000/-.  M/s. Surya Electronics placed the cheque through his banker, SBI, Koraput for collection from OP bank but unfortunately the OP returned the cheque on 03.04.2018 to SBI, Koraput citting the reason “Insufficient fund” in the accounts of the complainant.  The complainant on being informed checked the balance of his accounts on 03.04.2018 and found that he has Rs.56, 189.86 as balance on that date.  It is further submitted that due to cheque bounce M/s. Surya Electronics had to pay Rs.690/- as charges to the bank and thus the complainant had to pay Rs.55, 690/- in cash to M/s. Surya Electronics on dt.07.04.2018.  The complainant submitted that in spite of sufficient found in his account, the OP dishonoured the cheque for which his reputation became degraded in the society at large and the OP did not reply to the letter dt.07.04.2018 of the complainant.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OP, he has filed this case praying the Forum to grant compensation in his favour as the Forum deems fit and proper and direct the OP to pay Rs.10, 000/- towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

2.                         The Opp. Party filed counter admitting the SB accounts of the complainant with their bank and bounce of the Ch. No.019714 dt.31.3.2018 of the complainant citing the reason “Insufficient Fund”.  The OP contended that with no intention the cheque has been dishonoured wrongly and in reply to the letter of the complainant dt.07.04.2028, the OP has sent a regret letter to the complainant on 20.04.2018 and also begged apology to the complainant for their wrongs.  The OP further contended that the bank has provided necessary help to the complainant to withdraw the amount from the bank and also agreed to reverse the charges incurred by the complainant but the complainant has filed this case.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on its part, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                         The complainant has filed certain documents in support of his case.  No document is filed by the OP.  Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.

4.                         In this case SB accounts of the complainant with the OP bank and issue of Cheque No.019714 dt.31.03.2018 of the said bank by the complainant in favour of M/s. Surya Electronics, Koraput for Rs.55, 000/- and bounce of the said cheque by the OP citing reason “Insufficient Fund” are all admitted facts.  The complainant submitted that he issued a cheque of Rs.55, 000/- of Axis Bank in favour of M/s. Surya Electronics, Koraput against purchase of one LED TV when there was sufficient amount on his credit in the said bank but the bank dishonoured the cheque citing the reason “Insufficient Fund”.  Thereafter the complainant paid Rs.55, 690/- to M/s. Surya Electronics in cash on 07.04.2018 which includes Rs.690/- towards bank charges borne by M/s. Surya Electronics.  This fact is also admitted by the OP.

5.                         Further the complainant stated that on 07.04.2018 he wrote a letter to OP asking the reason behind dishonour of the cheque but the bank did not prefer to reply.  On the other hand the OP in his counter stated that he sent a regret letter through courier to the complainant on 20.04.2018 citing human error but failed to file the copy of that regret letter or any courier receipt in support of its contentions.  Non filing of such documents by the OP is a fatal as a simple pleading will not help the OP in any manner.  Such non clearance of cheque by the OP in our opinion certainly amounts deficiency in service on the part of bank branch.

6.                         It is quite natural that due to non clearance of the cheque, being a doctor lost his reputation before a trader and it only happened due to utter callousness of the OP bank.  Due to such inaction of the OP, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony and has come up with this case by engaging an advocate.  As such the complainant is entitled for some compensation and cost.  Considering the sufferings of the complainant, we feel, a sum of Rs.7000/- towards compensation and Rs.3000/- towards cost of litigation in his favour will meet the ends of justice.  The OP is also to refund Rs.690/- collected from M/s. Surya Electronics towards bank charges and borne by the complainant later on.

7.                         Hence ordered that the complaint petition is allowed in part and the Opp. Party is directed to refund Rs.690/- and to pay Rs.7000/- towards compensation besides Rs.3000/- towards cost to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order failing which the awarded sum shall carry interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of order till payment.

(to dict.)