BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER’S FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member, President (FAC),
And
Sri.M.V.R.Sharma, B.A., Member
Tuesday the 16th day of June, 2015
C.C.No.80/2014
Between:
E.Edward Bernard,
S/o E.Samuel,
Christian, Aged 49 Years,
H.No.45/24-D-24, Flat No.405,
Brindavan Towers-I,
Ashok Nagar, Kurnool-518 001. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India, Main Branch,
D.No.40/829, R.S. Road,
Kurnool-518 001.
2. The Assistant General Manager,
State Bank of India, Main Branch,
D.No.40/829, R.S. Road,
Kurnool-518 001.
3. The Regional Manager,
Regional Office, SBI, 3rd Floor,
Shop No. 1 to 5, U Con Plaza,
Kurnool-518 001. …OPPOSITE PARTIES
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.S.R.Ravi Kumar, Advocate for complainant and Sri.V.V.Krishnama Raju, Advocate for opposite party No.1 and opposite parties 2 and 3 called absent and set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member)
C.C. No.80/2014
1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying:-
- To direct the opposite parties to pay the forfeited amount of Rs.1,60,000/- by the complainant with interest at 24% from 12.12.2013, Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the negligent act of the opposite party and other reliefs as the Honourable Forum may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The case of the complaint in brief runs as follows:- The complainant E.Edward Bernard has been operating a savings Bank Account No.30093523122 with State Bank of India, Main Branch, Kurnool. He has issued a Cheque No.229948 dated 11.12.2013 for an amount of Rs.3,40,000/- to the Karnataka Bank, Kurnool Branch. But the said cheque had been returned back as unhonoured on 12.12.2013 with remarks stating that there are “Insufficient Funds” in the account of the complainant. The complainant approached the Bank Official. The Official concerned has replied very arrogantly and on clarification it was revealed that there was a balance of Rs.3,45,330/- in his account on that day. The said amount was intended to be paid to Gorantla Viswajeeth of Kurnool as a part of specific performance of Agreement of Sale of Land, Rs.1,60,000/- was already paid to him and the balance amount of Rs.3,40,000/- was required to be paid on 11.12.2013. But due to the negligent attitude of opposite parties, the complainant had to forfeit an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- as the legal notice has received from the Vendor for violating the specific performance of the Agreement of Sale. The behaviour of Bank Official was very disgustful and gross violation of Banking norms and deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and due to negligent act of opposite parties the complainant suffered lot of mental agony, financial loss, and social insult. Hence this complaint.
3. Opposite party No.1 filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is admitted that the complainant has been operating Savings Bank Account No.30093523122 with opposite party No.1 and he presented the Cheque bearing No.229948 to withdraw an amount of Rs.3,40,000/- from his Savings Bank Account on 11.12.2013 and it was returned on 12.12.2013 with memo stating that “Funds Insufficient”. It is submitted that the Agreement of Sale is created one for the purpose of this case and it was not stamped. The complainant issued legal notice on 21.01.2014 he did not plead the said fact of Agreement of Sale in that notice. Another notice dated 14.02.2014 issued by the Katam Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool is also created one. Subsequently the cheque of the complainant was honoured, there is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties 1 to 3 are not necessary parties. The complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.
Opposite parties 2 and 3 called absent and set exparte.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. Sworn affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party No.1 is filed. Documents are not filed.
5. Both sides filed Written Argument.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant had been operating Savings Bank Account No.30093523122 with opposite party No.1 and he presented the cheque bearing No.229948 to withdraw an amount of Rs.3,40,000/- from his account on 11.12.2013 and it was returned by opposite party No.1 on 12.12.2013 with memo stating that “Funds Insufficient”. The said cheque dated 11.12.2013 is marked as Ex.A1 and cheque return memo is marked as Ex.A2 dated 12.12.2013. It is the case of the complainant that he has entered into Agreement of Sale of Land with one Gorantla Viswajeeth of Kurnool and an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- was paid to him in advanced and the cheque amount of Rs.3,40,000/- required to be paid towards balance amount of specific performance on or before 11.12.2013. But due to the negligent attitude of opposite party he has forfeited an amount of Rs.1,60,000/- and received a legal notice from the said Vendor which is marked as Ex.A6 dated 14.02.2014 and he was subjected to financial loss, social insult and mental agony. The agreement of sale is marked as Ex.A3 dated 16.10.2013 the complainant issued by legal notice to opposite party No.1 which is marked as Ex.A4 dated 21.01.2014. Opposite party No.1 issued reply notice is marked as Ex.A5 dated 12.02.2014. The Bank Statement Showing to balance amount of Rs.3,45,330/- is marked as Ex.A7 dated 12.12.2013
It is the case of the opposite party No.1 that the Agreement of Sale is created one for the purpose of this case it was not stamped and not raised by the complainant the said fact in his legal notice issued by him to Opposite Party No.1. The Opposite Party No.1 got issued reply notice dated 12.02.2014 (Ex.A5) to the complainant. The complainant created another notice dated 14.02.2004 issued by Katam Srinivas Reddy, Kurnool. The complainant wants to take undue advantage of the situation.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the opposite Party No.1 contended that the said cheque was not given in the name of Gorantla Viswajeeth of Kurnool, or was issued to the Karnataka Bank. So it is false to plead that the cheque amount was intended to be paid to Visvajeeth as part of specific performance of the sale of land. The complainant availed a car loan with Opposite Party No.1 and on repayment of said loan the account was closed but hold of account was not removed as the complainant did not made any request for removal of the hold. Subsequently the said cheque was honoured by opposite Party No.1.
The learned counsel appearing for the complainant argued that due to the negligent attitude of the opposite Party No.1 the complainant suffered mental agony financial loss and social insult. The opposite Party No.1 dishonoured the cheque of the complainant on the ground insufficient funds when the complainant had sufficient funds in his account its amount to deficiency of service on the part of opposite Party No.1. To support his version he cited a decision reported in 1998 (1) CPR 648 (SCDRC-Delhi) in Ram Kanwar -Vs- Punjab National Bank where in it was held that dishonour of cheque of a customer on the ground of insufficiency of funds when the customer had sufficient balance will obviously amount to “faulty” and ‘imperfect’ manner of performance of service. This default is certainly covered in the definition of ‘deficiency’ in service under section 2(1) (g) of the Consumer Protection Act.
There is no dispute with regard to presentation of cheque bearing No.229948 by the complainant opposite Party No.1 for withdrawing an amount of Rs. 3,45,330/- under Ex.A1 dated 11.12.2013 and the opposite Party No.1 returned the cheque as insufficient fund in complainant’s account under Ex.A2 dated 12.12.2013. When the complainant had sufficient fund for an amount of Rs.3,45,330/- in his account at that date the opposite Party No.1 also admitted the said fact of sufficient fund in his account but due to heavy work over number of cheques will be coming for collection, clearing, the said mistake was happened it might have been not returned as there are funds in the said account. As seen from Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 and Ex.A7 it is evident that opposite parties Bank is negligent towards his discharging their duties it amount to deficiency of service on the part of opposite party no.1 and caused lot of mental agony to the complainant.
9. POINTS iii:- The complainant claim for the forfeited amount of Rs.1,60,000/- with interest at 24% and Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and Rs.25,000/- towards compensation for the negligent act of the opposite party. While awarding compensation for damages we have to consider the basis of quantum of loss. The complainant filed Ex.A3 dated 16.10.2013 the agreement of Sale of land it was not stamped and the legal notice Ex.A6 dated 14.02.2014 issued by Vendor Gorantla Viswajeeth, but the complainant did not mentioned the said fact of sale of agreement with the Vendor in his legal notice issued to the opposite party No.1 (Ex.A4) dated 21.01.2014 at the time of earliest point of time. The complainant did not choose to file an affidavits of witnesses of agreement of sale of land. Hence there is no force in the contention of complainant that he got loss of Rs.1,60,000/- as already paid to the Vendor and due to nonpayment of amount of Rs.3,40,000/- towards balance amount, so the amount of Rs.1,60,000/- was forfeited. We consider all the material available on record and decision relied by the complainant we hold the opinion that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and due to the negligent act of opposite parties the complainant suffered mental agony. Hence the complainant is entitled for compensation for an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the case.
10. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/-as costs of the case. Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 16th day of June, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant: Nil For the opposite parties: Nil
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Cheque bearing No.229948 dated 11.12.2013 for Rs.3,40,000/-.
Ex.A2 Letter of SBI, Kurnool returning the Cheque unhonored.
Ex.A3 Agreement Sale Deed dated 16.10.2013.
Ex.A4 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 21.01.2014.
Ex.A5 Reply Notice of opposite party dated 12.02.2014.
Ex.A6 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 14.02.2014.
Ex.A7 Bank ATM Statements showing the balance amount as on 12.12.2013.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:- Nil
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT (FAC)
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
