BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Monday the 5th day of December, 2011
C.C.No.40/2011
Between:
A.Ramana Goud,
S/o Venkata Swamy,
Retired Railway Office Superintendent,
Plot No.333,
Geethamukerjee Nagar,
Behind Santosh Nagar,
Kurnool-518 003. …Complainant
-Vs-
The Chief Manager,
State Bank of India,
Main Branch, H.No.40/837,
Railway Station Road,
Kurnool-518 003. ...Opposite ParTy
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri P.Siva Sudarshan, Advocate for complainant and Sri V.V.Krishnam Raju, Advocate for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)
C.C. No.40/2011
1. This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-
- To direct the opposite party to refund Rs.3,300/- which was deducted from the S.B. Account of complainant;
- To pay Rs.60,000/- to the complainant as the complainant paid that amount to Y.Venugopal due to negligent act of the opposite party;
- To grant a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards mental agony;
- To grant costs of the complaint;
- To grant any other relief or reliefs as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant is having S.B. Account bearing No.10826370026 in opposite party bank. The complainant lost signed cheques bearing No.402841 to 860 while shifting his residence from N.Konthalapadu Village to present address in April, 2003. He intimated the same to opposite party on 17-04-2003 through registered post and requested the opposite party not to make any payment through the said cheques. But on 30-06-2006 one Y.Venugopal has drawn Rs.3,300/- vide cheque No.402849. On the same day the complainant went to opposite party bank and requested the opposite party to stop the payment through the above said cheques. On the report of the complainant endorsement of stop payment was made and a sum of Rs.220/- was deducted in the S.B. Account. Again Y.Venugopal submitted cheque No.402850 dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- cheque No.402851 dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/- through Andhra Bank and both cheques were returned by opposite party with a reason funds in sufficient. The said Y.Venugopal filed a Criminal Case against the complainant under section 138 N.I. Act. The opposite party should have endorsed stop payment on the cheques presented by Y.Venugopal. When the complainant sent a notice to opposite party the opposite party sent return memo stating the “Payments Stopped by Drawer”. But JFCM Court convicted the complainant on 24-07-2009. The complainant preferred an appeal before the District Court and the matter was settled. The complainant paid an amount of Rs.60,000/- to the said Y.Venugopal. There is negligence on the part of opposite party. The complainant was put to mental agony. There was damage to the reputation of complaint. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite party filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. The complainant holds S.B. Account bearing No.10826370026 with opposite party bank. On 30-06-2006 one Y.Venugopal has drawn Rs.3,300/- through cheque. The complainant did not intimation to opposite party on 17-04-2003about the missing of the cheques. It is true the cheque No.402850 dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- and cheque No.402851 dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/- presented through Andhra Bank were returned for reason funds insufficient instead of “Payments Stopped by Drawer”. A Criminal Case in CC 527/2007 was filed under section 138 of N.I. Act against the complainant by Y.Venugopal. The JFCM Court has not believed the version of the complainant. The complainant and Y.Venugopal compromised the Criminal Case when it was pending in Sessions Court. There is no negligence on the part of the opposite party. The complainant not suffered mental agony. There was no damage to the reputation. The complainant did not give police complaint when he lost the cheques. The complaint is barred by time. The complainant is not entitled to any amount from the opposite party. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A13 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite party the sworn affidavit of the opposite party is filed. No document is marked.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?
- Whether the complaint is barred by time?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant is having S.B. Account No.10826370026 with the opposite party. The complainant is also having cheque book facility. It is also admitted that on 30-06-2006 one Y.Venugopal has withdrawn an amount of Rs.3,300/- through cheque No.402849. It is further admitted that the cheque No.402850 dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- and cheque No.402851 dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/- presented by Y.Venugopal through Andhra Bank were returned for the reason funds insufficient. It is further admitted that one Y.Venugopal filed a Criminal Case against the complainant in JFCM Court, Kurnool in C.C.No.527/2007 under section 138 of N.I. Act and that the complainant was convicted in the said case. The complainant preferred Appeal before the District Court in Criminal Appeal No.150/2009 and the complainant herein and Y.Vengopal compromised the matter and the complainant paid Rs.60,000/- to the said Y.Venugopal.
8. It is the case of the complainant that while he was shifting his residence from N.Konthalapadu Village he lost signed cheques bearing No.402841 to 860 in April, 2003 and the said fact was intimated to the opposite party bank on 17-04-2003. No doubt the complainant in his sworn affidavit stated that he lost signed cheques in April, 2003, while he was shifting his residence. The opposite party denied the said fact. Admittedly no complaint was lodged by the complainant to police stating that he lost signed cheques in April, 2003, while shifting his house from N.Konthalapadu Village. It is stated by the complainant that he sent a notice to opposite party bank on 17-04-2003 through registered post stating that he lost signed cheques while shifting his house in April, 2003 and requested the bank stop payment through said cheques. The opposite party bank denied the same. The complainant filed Ex.A7 copy of alleged letter along with postal receipt. Ex.A7 postal receipt does not contain the date. The complainant did not file the postal acknowledgement evidencing that he sent Ex.A7 letter dated 17-04-2003 to the opposite party and that the opposite party received the same. In the absence of documentary evidence the contention of the complainant that on 17-04-2003 he sent a registered letter to the opposite party requesting the bank to stop payment through cheques cannot be believed. Admittedly on 30-06-2006 one Y.Venugopal has drawn Rs.3,300/- through cheque No.402849 and the complainant came to know about the said fact on the very same day. According to the complainant he lost signed cheques in April, 2003, and that one Y.Venugopal has withdrawn Rs.3,300/- through cheque No.402849. If Y.Venugopal is unknown to the complainant it is not unknown why the complainant kept quit without giving report against said Y.Venugopal who has withdrawn RS.3,300/- through cheque No.402849. The in action of the complainant in giving police report against Y.Venugopal immediately after 30-06-2006 goes to show that there is no truth in the contention of the complainant.
9. Admittedly Y.Venugopal presented the cheque No.402850 dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- and cheque No.402851 dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/- through Andhra Bank and the said cheques were returned by opposite party bank on 23-11-2006 for the reason funds insufficient. According to the complainant on 30-06-2006 he requested opposite party bank not to make any payment through signed cheques and that endorsement stopped payment was made and an amount of Rs.220/- was deducted from S.B. Account of the complainant. Ex.A1 is the copy of pass book of the complainant. It is shown in Ex.A1 that on 30-06-2006 an amount of Rs.220/- was deducted towards transfer charges for MAR RFRBSR. The opposite party bank did not admit that on 30-06-2006 the complainant met the bank official and got endorsement stopped payment in the S.B. Account of the complainant. The complainant filed Ex.A8 dated 30-06-2006 where in it is mentioned that the complainant requested the bank not to make any payment to any one through cheques from his account. On that there is endorsement by the bank authorities stating that the payment through cheques bearing No.402841 to 402860 to be stopped. Admittedly the opposite party bank returned the cheques dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- and cheque dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/- stating insufficient funds. Admittedly sufficient amount was not there in the S.B. Account of the complainant to honour the cheques dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- and 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/-. There is no negligence on the part of the opposite party bank in returning the cheques for want of funds. Merely because the opposite party bank not made endorsement that the drawer stopped the payment through cheques, it cannot be said that there was negligence on the part of the opposite party bank. The opposite party bank was right in returning the cheques stating insufficient funds. The complainant has not approached the Forum with clan hands. The complainant filed Ex.A10 copy of the judgment in C.C.No.527/2007 on the file of JFCM, Court Kurnool. As seen from Ex.A10 it is very clear that the complainant borrowed Rs.5,000/- from Y.Venugopal and issued cheque No.402850 dated 29-09-2006 for Rs.5,000/- to discharge the said debt. Further the complainant borrowed Rs.55,000/- from the said Y.Venugopal and issued cheque bearing No.402850 dated 15-11-2006 for Rs.55,000/-. The learned JFCM came to the conclusion that the complainant herein barrowed the above said amounts from Y.Venugopal and issued the cheques to discharge the debits. Admittedly the complainant herein preferred an appeal before the Session Court, Kurnool and while the appeal was pending the complainant herein compromised with Y.Venugopal and paid Rs.60,000/- to the said Y.Venugopal. The complainant herein in order to trouble Y.Venugopal with a malafied intention requested the opposite party bank to stop payment through cheques. There is no truth in the contention of the complainant. The present complaint is filed in order to gain wrongfully. Admittedly there was no sufficient amount in the account of the complainant to honour the cheques dated 29-09-2006 and 15-11-2006 issued by the complainant to Y.Venugopal. As there was no sufficient amount in the account of the complainant the opposite party bank returned the said cheques for the reason insufficient funds. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite party bank. The complainant has approached the Forum with unclean hands by making false allegation to gain wrongfully. The complainant is not entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
10. Point No.iii:- It is the case of the opposite party that the complaint is barred by time. For filing the complaint the period of limitation is two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen. The complainant filed the present complaint on 06-04-2011 alleging that the opposite party returned the cheques presented by Y.Venugopal for the reason that there was no sufficient amount. Admittedly the complainant got issued Ex.A6 notice dated 28-09-2007 to the opposite party bank stating that inspite of his request for stop payment the bank returned the cheques with an endorsement that there was no sufficient amount in the account. The complainant by 28-09-2007 got knowledge that the cheques presented by Y.Venugopal were returned for the reason that there was no sufficient amount. The complainant ought to have filed the present complaint against the opposite party on or before 28-09-2009. Admittedly the complainant has not filed any petition to condone the delay in filing the complaint. The cause of action for filing the present complaint against the opposite party bank arose on 28-09-2007 when the complainant came to know about the return of cheques for want of sufficient amount in his account. The complainant kept quiet for two years and filed the present complaint on 06-04-2011 after the expiry of period of limitation. The present complaint is barred by time.
11. In the result, the complaint is dismissed directing the complainant to pay costs of Rs.1,000/- to the opposite party.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 5th day of December, 2011.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite party : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of State Bank of India Saving Bank Pass
Book dated 21-07-2005.
Ex.A2. Photo copy of Counter – Foil for Rs.5,000/-
dated 24-07-2009.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of Judgment in CC.527/2007 In the Court of the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Kurnool,
dated 18-06-2009.
Ex.A4 Photo copy of Compromise Memo filed in Criminal Appeal
in 150/2009.
Ex.A5 Photo copy of Letter of Stat e Bank of India to
Andhra Bank dated 18-10-2007.
Ex.A6 Photo copy of letter by complainant to opposite party
dated 28-09-2007.
Ex.A7 Photo copy of letter of complainant to opposite party
dated 17-04-2003 along with postal receipt and acknowledgment.
Ex.A8 Photo copy of Letter by complainant to opposite party dated 30-06-2006.
Ex.A9 Photo copy of Deposition of D.W.2 in CC.527/2007
dated 09-07-2009.
Ex.A10 Photo copy of Calendar and Judgment of In the Court of
the Special Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Kurnool
dated 24-07-2009.
Ex.A11 Eenadu Daily News Paper, Kurnool Edition
dated 29-12-2010.
Ex.A12 Eenadu Daily News Paper, Kurnool Edition
dated 25-07-2009.
Ex.A13 Photo copy of letter of opposite party to complainant
dated 07-09-2009 along with tow cheque return memo.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:- NILL
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// 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 :
