For Complainant          :             Sri Bishnu Prasad Patra, Advocate & associates.

For OP No.1                    :             Sri K. N. Samantaray, Advocate & associates.

For OP No.2                    :             Sri Rabindra Kumar Panda, Advocate.

                                                                                      -x-

1.                         The brief history of the case of the complainant is that he was having a C.C. A/c bearing No.30762167663 with OP.2 bank and against that account the complainant had pledged LIC policy bond No.571037361.  It is submitted that during closure of C.C. A/c the complainant found that one cheque bearing No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 for Rs.15, 000/- of Axis Bank, Jeypore was issued by OP.1 towards money back under Policy No.571-37361 which has not been adjusted against the C. C. a/c.  It is further submitted that regarding realisation of above mentioned cheque, the Ops have failed to intimate the complainant.  Thus alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Ops, he filed this case praying the Forum to direct the Ops to settle the claim with interest @ 18% p.a. and to pay Rs.50, 000/- towards compensation to the complainant.

2.                         The OP.1 filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that neither the policy No.571037361 has been assigned to any bank nor any money back cheque has been issued vide cheque No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 under the said policy.  It is further contended that a valid assignment exists against Policy No.570212328 with SBI, Jeypore and a Cheque bearing No.0001076 dt.15.5.2010 of Axis Bank for an amount of Rs.15, 000/- was issued against Policy No.570212328 under money back and the same was credited in the SBI, Jeypore and the policy in question is reassigned to the complainant on 24.2.2017.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on its part, the OP prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

3.                         The OP.2 also filed counter denying the allegations of the complainant and contended that the alleged Cheque bearing No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 has been collected by OP.2 and to that effect a banker’s cheque bearing No.122894382 was issued in the name of Annapurna General Store of the complainant on 04.06.2010 at his request and the said instrument was also paid under his acknowledgement in the form of STDR No.31674590423 dt.17.03.2011 and subsequently the said STDR was closed and credited to the C. C. Account of the complainant on 23.05.2013.  It is further contended that the complainant does not know from which policy the money back amount of Rs.15, 000/- came vide Cheque No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010.  The OP also further contended that the alleged cheque of Rs.15, 000/- relates to Policy No.570212328 but not Policy No.571037361 and the bank has never received any amount against Policy No.571037361 from LIC, Jeypore.  Thus denying any deficiency in service on its part, the OP.2 also prayed to dismiss the case of the complainant.

4.                         The complainant has filed certain documents along with affidavit in support of his case.  The OP.2 has filed affidavit.  Heard from the Ops through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.  The complainant has filed written argument through his A/R.

5                          In this case opening of C.C. a/c vide No. 30762167663 by the complainant with OP.2 is an admitted fact.  The complainant stated that he had pledged LIC policy bond No.571037361 for that a/c but after closer of said C.C. a/c, he found that one cheque bearing No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 of Axis bank, Jeypore for Rs.15, 000/- was issued by the LIC but the said cheque amount has not been adjusted against the C. C. a/c.  The complainant further stated that the fact regarding issue of cheque by OP.1 to OP.2 has come to the notice when the complainant verified the policy status on 30.1.2017 with the OP.1 at the time of closer of C. C. A/c.

6.                         The OP.1 in his counter at para-2 stated that Policy No.571037361 of the complainant has not been assigned to any bank and the LIC has never issued any cheque bearing No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 under policy No. 571037361 as because there was no due for the payment at that time but the due falls on 28.11.2017 only.  The OP.1 clarified that there is a valid assignment against Policy No.570212328 to SBI, Main Branch, Jeypore and a Cheque bearing No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 for an amount of Rs.15, 000/- was issued under the Policy No.570212328 which was credited to SBI, Main Branch, Jeypore.  The Policy No.570212328 was reassigned to the complainant on 14.02.2017.

7.                         The OP No.2 also stated the same thing in his counter and also at the time of hearing it is stated that Cheque No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 relates to Policy No.570212328 but not Policy No.571037361 and the bank has never received any amount from the LIC against the alleged Policy No.571037361.

8.                         On perusal of record it was noticed that no document has been filed by the complainant except bare pleading in order to show that the Policy No.571037361 was assigned to OP.1 against C. C. a/c and the cheque was issued by the LIC against the above policy.  On the other hand, the LIC-OP.1 stated that Policy No.571037361 was never assigned to any bank and they have never issued Cheque No.0041076 dt.15.5.2010 for Rs.15, 000/- as money back in respect of said policy. The OP No.2 also stated that the alleged cheque relates to Policy No.570212328 but not policy No.571037361 which was kept in the form of STDR and later on adjusted in the current account of the complainant on 23.5.2017.

9.                         In the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops and the case of the complainant has no leg to stand.  When there is no case of any kind or the Ops are not related to the present case filed by the complainant, we carefully treat it as vexatious attempt by the complainant in the form of this case against the Ops.

10.                       The A/R for the complainant has received the copy of counter of the Ops and must have gone through the same.  Instead of verifying the matter with the Ops, the A/R for the complainant has filed written argument reiterating the prayers made in the complaint petition and tried to keep alive the case for final orders.  This is unfair on the part of the complainant.  When there is no case arose out of C. C. a/c and the LIC policy in question, the complainant has unnecessarily dragged the OPs to the Forum by filing this case and misusing the provisions of C. P. Act.  As such we treat this case U/S.26 of C. P. Act which goes to say about frivolous and vexatious case.  Hence the complainant in our opinion is to pay a token amount of Rs.100/- each to the Ops towards cost in this case.

11.                       In view of the above facts, we dismiss the case of the complainant and direct the complainant to pay Rs.100/- each to the Ops 1 & 2 towards cost within 30 days from the date of communication of this order.

(to dict.)