Bijoy Shankar Ojha,

s/o. late Rama Kant Ojha

of 5/6/1, Dharmatolla Road, Salkia,

Howrah – 711106.--------------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

1.         The Branch Manager,

            Bank of India, Salkia Branch,

131/132,  G.T. Road,  

            Howrah – 711106.

2.         The Zonal Manager.

            ( Howrah Zonal Office ),

            Bank of India,

5, Biplab Trialakya,

Maharaj Sarani ( 4^th floor ),

Kolkata – 700001. ------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                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.               It is the specific case of the complainant, Bijoy Shankar Ojha, that although he did not put his signature on the cheque being no. 563922 on 28-11-2011 for an amount of  Rs. 30,000/-, o.p. cleared the said cheque without proper verification and thereby alleging severe negligence on the part of the o.p.  no. 1, complainant filed this instant petition praying for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to refund Rs. 30,000/-, to pay an amount of  Rs. 30,000/-  as compensation along with litigation costs and other reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper. 

2.               Brief facts of the case is that complainant is an S/B A/c holder with o.p. no. 1 being A/C no. 401610100036465. Complainant resides at the address given in this petition as a tenant. On 04-12-2011, he went to his native place in   Bihar and returned on 20-12-2011. After remaining to this present address, he felt the need of money and on searching,  he found that the cheque book related to his S/B A/C was missing.  And subsequently he came to know that Rs. 30,000/- was withdrawn from his S/B A/C on 28-11-2011 through cheque no. 563922 vide Annexure. Thereafter, he met the official of o.p. no. 1 for several times. But nothing fruitful happened. Ultimately, on 17-09-2012 and 05-12-2012, complainant sent lawyer’s notice to both o.ps. asking for the refund of Rs. 30,000/- vide Annexures. But no reply was received by the complainant till the filing of this instant case.   

3.               Notices were served. O.ps. appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, case heard on contest.

4.               Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainant is  entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5.               Both the points are  taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version filed by o.p. and noted its contents. It is the specific plea of o.ps. that as per agreement dated 16-11-2011 entered into between the complainant and one, Smt. Sakuntala Devi, complaiant himself gave the bearer cheque being no. 563922 dated 28-11-2011 which was encashed by one, Sri Monoj Gupta, being the proprietor of M/S Jaiswal Iron Store on 28-11-2011 vide Annexure ‘A’ of written version. We have carefully gone through the said agreement dated 16-11-2011, in  which the name of the complainant, Bijoy Shankar Ojha  is appearing on each and every page. And it is also to  be noted that the same style of signature of the complainant is appearing on the cheque being no. 563922 dated 28-11-2011. And one P.S. Case No. 403 of 2011 was  lodged before Malipanchghora Police Station, Howrah on 28-12-2011. O.p. no. 1 started investigation and informed about the details of such amount of  Rs. 30,000/- withdrawn from the S.B. A/c  of the complainant held with o.p. no. 1 to O.C., Malipanchghora P.S. vide their letter dated 08-02-2012. Here we take a pose. The signature of the complainant appearing on this instant complaint filed on 14-09-2013 totally differs  from the signature of the complainant that appears in the agreement dated 16-11-2011 and the cheque dated 28-11-2011 annexed by the o.p. no. 1. So, we called the complainant and he came on 23-04-2014. He was asked to sign on a blank paper in front of all of us. And we procure his signature with date. It is surprising enough that the signature of the complainant that appears in this instant complaint / petition and the latest one which he put on 23-04-2014 are same and identical. Complainant has also categorically denied that any agreement dated 16-11-2011 entered into by him and Mrs. Sakuntala Devi as well as no cheque bearing no. 563922 dated 28-11-2011 was signed and given by him to one Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta. O.p. no. 1 also has not annexed the copy of specimen signature of the complainant kept with the branch for verifying the signatures at the time of encashment of the cheque in question. People depose their utmost faith on the bank as the safest custodian of their hard-earned money. O.ps. should not have been so much careless. It was the utmost duty of the o.ps. to be far more careful about this kind of wrong encashment of the cheques. Complainant  has even denied the fact of any investigation started by the o.p. no. 1.

6.               Under the above premises, it is very clear to us that o.p. no. 1 was not enough careful at the time of verification of signature of the complainant while giving approval to the encashment of the cheque in question. Accordingly, we hold the o.ps. to be deficient in service and the case succeeds on merit. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 329 of 2013 ( HDF  329 of 2013 )  is  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.Ps. 

      That the  O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to reimburse Rs. 30,000/- and credit the same to the complainant’s S.B. A/C no. 401610100036465, if it is valid till date or  pay the amount through account payee cheque within 30 days from the date of this order.

      That the o.ps. are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.

      The o.ps. are directed to pay the entire decretal amount of Rs. 42,000/- within one month from this order, i.d., it shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till actual payment.

      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.