DATE OF FILING : 30.10.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 06.02.2015.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 11.02.2016.
Shri Shyamal Banerjee,
son of late Mahadeb Banerjee,
81/1, Shastri N.N. Ganguly Road, Bator, P.O. Santragachi,
P.S. Shibpur, District Howrah,
PIN 711104. ………………...……………………………………………….. COMPLAINANT.
The Branch Manager,
Paschim Banga Gramin Bank,
Bator Branch,
78/1, Shastri N.N. Ganguly Road, Bator, P.O. Santragachi,
P.S. Shibpur, District Howrah,
PIN 711104…….………………………………………………..…………OPPOSITE PARTY.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.
F I N A L O R D E R
- Complainant, Shri Shyamal Banerjee, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. to pay the cheque value of Rs. 33,420/- vide cheque no. 409193 dated 05.09.2012, to pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation along with other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.
- Brief fact of the case is that complainant deposited one cheque bearing no. 409193 of Rs. 33,420/- dated 05.09.2012 with his bank account having no. 10360110007047 for encashment of the same held with o.p. Bank vide Annexure deposit slip dated 15.09.2012. But it was lost in transit. O.p. also sent a letter to the cheque issuing authority being Ashoke Nagar Post Office, Ranchi, Jharkhand, to re-issue a fresh cheque for which o.p. also submitted an indemnity bond vide Annexures ‘C’, ‘D’, ‘F’ & ‘G’. And in all these letters dated 18.03.2013 & 08.11.2013 etc. o.p. has admitted that after receiving the said cheque from the complainant, they sent for collection and it was lost in transit. It is to be mentioned here that the cheque was drawn on S.B.I., Doranda Branch, by Ashoke Nagar Post Office, Ranchi, Jharkhand, towards the maturity payment of N.S.Cs. lying in the name of the complainant. Complainant mortgaged those with o.p., Bank, to avail himself of a house building loan which he already repaid in full.Thereafter several requests were made but the o.p. refused to pay the amount on every occasion.Subsequently complainant complained before Assistant Director, Howrah Regional Office, Howrah, but no fruitful result has been achieved. Ultimately complainant sent a letter dated 22.10.2014 to the o.p. bank but the o.p. did not take any positive step. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative complainant filed this instant case with the aforesaid prayers.
- Notice was served. O.P. appeared and filed written version. Accordingly, the case was heard on contest.
- Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version and noted its contents. This Forum heard the ld. counsels of both sides and perused the written argument filed by them. On scrutiny of the complaint petition it is noticed that the complainant deposited the above mentioned cheque in his account before the o.p. bank for encashment and the o.p. sent the cheque for clearance but in transit the cheque was lost. In this connection, although o.p. sent several letters to the cheque issuing authority being Ashoke Nagar Post office, complainant did not get the maturity benefit being Rs. 33,420/- in connection with the NSCs which were mortgaged by him for availing himself of a house building loan given by o.p. It is also a fact that those certificates were lying under the custody of the o.p. and the entire loan amount was repaid by the complainant. In spite of that complainant could not enjoy his maturity benefit of his NSCs. O.p. should have been more careful at the time of encashment of the said cheque in question because after receiving the cheque in question o.p. was required to send the same for collection of the amount which is entirely the official procedure to be followed by o.p. itself. So o.p. should have adopted utmost care so as to protect the interest of the complainant who deposed all his faith upon o.p. Due to o.p.’s gross negligence the complainant has been facing financial problem since 15.09.2012 for no fault on his part. O.p. has miserably failed to discharge its boundant duty which certainly amounts to deficiency in service on its part which should not be allowed to be perpetuated for an indefinite period. And we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
In the result, the application succeeds.
Court fee paid is correct.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 563 of 2014 ( HDF 563 of 2014 ) be allowed on contest with costs against the O.P.
That the O.P. is directed to pay the aforesaid cheque amount of Rs. 33,420/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.
That the o.p. is further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs.
That the o.p. is further directed to pay the entire amount of Rs. 53,420/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order i.d., the aforesaid amount shall carry an interest @ 8% per annum till full realization.
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.
