DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: BHADRAK
Dated the 4th day of January, 2020
C.D Case No. 21 of 2017
Present 1. Shri Raghunath Kar, President
2. Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick, Member
3. Afsara Begum, Member
Kalandi Rout
S/o Brundaban Rout,
Vill: Moulagadia,
Po: Chhayalsingh
Ps: Bonth,
Dist: Bhadrak ……………………. Complainant
(Versus)
The Branch Manager, Bank of India, Kadabaranga Branch
At/Po: Kadabaranga,
Ps: Agarpada,
Dist: Bhadrak …………………………..Opp. Parties
Counsel For Complainant: Sri J. B. Agasti, Adv & Others
Counsel For the OP: Sri S. Panda, Adv & Others
Date of hearing: 02.07.2019
Date of order: 04.01.2020
RAGHUNATH KAR, PRESIDENT
This dispute arises out of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the OP that the complainant had presented a self cheque bearing No. 005124 in the OP Bank on dt. 08.02.2017 of an amount of Rs 2,00,000/- for withdrawing within time of the Bank hour and the same was also granted by filed officer and cashier. Further the complainant states that without any cause the OP did not pay the said withdrawal amount to the complainant and the OP also harassed the complainants and for that reason the complainant did not meet his expenditure for development work in his business affairs. So, the complainant’s mental agony has been raised due to non-payment of the said amount to the complainant. The complainant states that when the said amount has not paid to his client, he has lost Rs 10,00,000/- for the same. Because the said withdrawal amount will be deposited at transporting charge and labour payments. The OP has committed mistake due to non-payment of the withdraw money. So, the complainant has committed deficiency in service for non-payment of the said withdrawal money. The complainant also sent a legal notice to OP on dt. 09.02.2017 for allowing the said presented cheque for withdrawal of money. But the OP remained silent about it and replied against the said legal notice, which is not satisfactory answer to the complainant. So, having no alternative way, the complainant ahs compelled to file this case before this Forum. The cause of action for the present consumer dispute matter arose on 08.02.2017 and the cause of action arose on 09.02.2017, when the legal notice was sent to the OP and further the cause of action arose on 17.02.2017 when the OP refused to payment the cheque amount through his advocate.
Hence the complainant has sought for the following reliefs.
1. The OP be directed to pay the cheque amount of Rs 2,00,000/- to the complainant.
2. The OP be directed to pay for Rs 50,000/- for mental agony and for other damages.
3. The cost of the proceeding be given to the complainant.
4. Any other relief be given to the complainant, which Court feels fit and proper.
Documents filed by the complainant.
1. Legal notice- 2 sheets.
2. Reply of the legal notice issued on behalf of the OP.
The OP had filed his written version through his concerned advocate as well as an affidavit as follows that the OP has challenged the cause of action and the maintainability of the complaint. He has denied all the allegations made by the complainant in his complaint. The facts admitted by the OP Bank that the complainant has got his cash credit account in the OP Bank. The complainant have presented the cheque for withdrawal of cash which is amount to Rs 2,00,000/- from his account. During that period demolition process was going on. The OP Bank is situated in rural area. In rural Branches were constrained in the scnario of demonetization the Bank had to arrange cash taking indents of the customer particularly big payments and cash was arranged by the Bank from the main Branch. Particularly on that day other customers cash payment was there in the Branch and also cash for A.T.M was also on that day. The Branch Manager of OP Bank advised to the complainant either to make the cash less transaction instead of cash withdrawal through cheque in cash credit amount which is trading A/c or to wait for withdrawal after payment of cash to other customers who were in the queue before you, for withdrawal of cash in small amounts. But the complainant did not keep his patience and asked for the cheque and returned back the same immediately. As such OP Bank has not committed any wrong act with the complainant. The OP has also averred that he has committed no deficiency of service to the complainant. Hence the complaint be dismissed. The OP has file no document on behalf of him.
OBSERVATION
We have already perused the complaint and written version filed by the complainant and the OP. The complainant has filed a copy of legal notice sent by his concerned advocate to the OP and copy of the reply issued by the OP advocate. The complainant shall have to make out the deficiency of service of the OP. Neither the complainant nor the OP has filed any document regarding this. As the onus lies upon the complainant, he has to prove his case. The complainant has neither filed the Xerox copy of the said cheque nor the copy of the counter foil in connection of the said cheque. The complainant has averred in his complaint that he has deposited the said cheque bearing No. 005124 in the OP Bank on dt. 08.02.2017 but no document he has filed in support of his stand. The legal notice is not a relevant document to prove his case. The OP has averred in his written version as well as his advocate also mentioned in his reply that the OP has committed no deficiency of service towards the complainant. In the reply that the OP advised to the complainant that to make the cash less transaction instead of cash withdrawal regularly through self cheque in cash credit account to withdraw money next day. The OP has admitted that the complainant has cash credit account in the OP Bank. The complainant had presented the cheque for withdrawal of cash value date Rs 2,00,000/- from his said account. During that period demonetization process was going on the Rural Branches were in a scenario of demonetization. The Bank had to arrange cash taking indents of the customer particularly lump sum payments and cash was arranged by the OP Bank from the Main Branch. Particularly on that day the Branch Manager of the OP Bank advised to the complainant either to make this cash less transaction instead of cash withdrawal through the cheque in cash credit account which is a trading account or to wait for withdrawal after payment of cash to other customers who were in the queue before the complainant but the complainant did not have his patience. The OP banker returned back the same cheque to the complainant immediately. As the complainant patience less to stand in the queue he was also not agreed to wait for his turn would come, the said cheque was kept with the complainant himself so the cheque could not be enchased. In the present case we do not find that the OP has committed deficiency of service and dishonest trade practice. Hence it is ordered;
ORDER
The complaint be and the same is dismissed without any cost & compensation against the OP.
This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this day of 4th January, 2020 under my hand and seal of the Forum.
