ORDER BY HON’BLE MEMBER- MRS. M. SWAIN:
JUDGMENT
Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;
“Direct the opposite party to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony suffered by a senior citizen, Rs.25,000/- towards deficiency of services and Rs.25,000/- towards illegal trade practices of the opposite party along with Rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation”.
The brief fact of the case is that, the complainant is a permanent resident of village Ohala of Jagatsinghpur district and a senior citizen and also retired staff of S.B.I. and used to pay his electric bill which is in the name of his son Pratap Ku. Singh by depositing the cheque of SBI (ADB), Jagatsinghpur Branch. On 20.12.2019 the complainant issued a cheque in favour of Manager, CESU, JED amounting to Rs.438/- bearing cheque No.464184, corresponding to A/c No.11297606588 of SBI (ADB), Jagatsinghpur. Though sufficient fund was available in the above mention account from which cheque was issued, the said cheque was bounced by the opposite party on 03.01.2020. On 14.02.2020 office of Manager, CESU, JED, Jagatsinghpur issued a letter bearing No.206 to inform about bouncing of the cheque No.464184 dtd.20.12.2019 of Rs.438/-. Complainant on 23.3.2020 met the Chief Manager, SBI (ADB), Jagatsinghpur and handed over a letter dtd.23.3.2020 to look into the matter but all the effort of complainant is in vein the opposite party did not took any action or intimate the complainant. Due to cheque bounce the Manager, CESU, JED, Jagatsinghpur charged a sum of Rs.11.70 from rebate, Rs.177/- as bank charges and Rs.300/- as fine as per CESU norms.
Hence this complaint, complainant submitted following documents;
- Letter from CESU in regard to cheque bouncing.
- Reason for return of CESU.
- Request letter of complainant to SBI on 23.3.2020.
- Account statement of complainant.
In the written version of the opposite party stated that, unfortunately due to technical problem of the internet system the amount pending in the account of the complainant shows that there was ‘funds insufficient’, for which the intending cheque of the complainant was dishonoured and accordingly the memo of dishonor supplied to the depositor of the said cheque. As per norms of the bank the amount of Rs.311/- was deducted from the account of the complainant. Unfortunately due to technical problem of the internet system said alleged money has been deducted from the savings bank account of the complainant. The said process is not intentionally, but it was the aforesaid reasons, which prevented the opposite party to render the proper service. The opposite party did not neglect to provide the service to the complainant, it was the aforesaid reasons i.e. internet technical problem, which was beyond the control of the opposite party and prevented the opposite party to discharge his duty as per the indication of the system.
Opposite party also clearly mentioned in his written version that due to technical problem of the internet system the amount pending in the account of the complainant shows that there was ‘funds insufficient’ for which the intending cheque of the complainant was dishonoured and accordingly the memo of dishonor supplied to the depositor of the said cheque. For which the senior citizen who is complainant cannot give his electricity bill in time for which the electricity department impose fine of Rs.438/- for dishonor of his cheque and mentioned that if the fine was not given by complainant then power supply will be disconnected. Hence it is crystal clear that negligence was done on the part of opposite party which creates deficiency of service.
The complaint is allowed. Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.438/- to the complainant and we impose cost of Rs.3,000/- on opposite party for compensation of mental agony and Rs.2,000/- as cost of litigation and opposite party is directed to carry out the order within 30 days from the date of passing the order.
Pronounced in the open Commission on this 30th Dec.,2022.
