In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.   257 / 2008.

1)                   Sri Ranaji Ganguly and

2)                   Smt. Nipa Ganguly

of 136, Harish Mukherjee Road, Kol-25.                                                  ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   The Manager, The Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.,

Ideal Plaza, 11/1, Sarat Bose Road, Kol-20.

2)                   The General Manager, Zonal Office, The Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.,

2A, Nlesh Broadway, 9/3, M.G. Road, Bangalore—560001.                     ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member

Order No.   30    Dated  30/01/2012.

The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant Sri Ranaji Ganguly and Smt. Nipa Ganguly against the o.ps. Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that complainants had purchased two Managers cheques / bankers cheques / bank drafts each of Rs.90,000/- bearing no.148184 and 148185 from the o.ps. and on 12.3.08 at about 8-00 p.m. complainant no.1 while returning by a taxi to home containing some important documents and five bank drafts out of which three were of Canara Bank of Rs.40,000/- each and the two aforesaid drafts of the o.ps. being the subject matter of the case i.e. Rs.90,000/- plus Rs.90,000/-, complainant out of mistake step down from the taxi leaving this bag containing aforesaid documents and thereafter lodged diary at Kalighat P.S. and on 13.3.08 by writing letter informed o.ps. for ‘stop payment immediately’ of the aforesaid band drafts of Rs.90,000/- each and on 22.3.08 and 15.4.08 complainant made request for refund of Rs.1,80,000/- and o.ps. directed to complainant to furnish indemnity bond in this regard and complainant did so and thereafter it has been alleged by complainant that o.ps. undertook investigation in which complainant was never asked to take part in the matter of investigation and thereafter complainant made several correspondences together with legal notice for refund of the aforesaid amount, but o.ps. did not pay heed to them. Hence the instant case has been filed by the complainant with a prayer mentioned in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.

            O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v denying all the material allegations labeled against them and stated that complainant informed o.ps. ‘stop payment’ and o.ps. on 15.3.08 directed Central Bank of India, Kolkata not to present for clearing by the Patuapara Branch of Central Bank of India, Kolkata. In view of the complainants’ instruction pending inquiry into the matter undertaken by o.ps. the drafts were returned by the o.p. no.1 with the remark ‘reported loss’ and thereafter on the basis of the letter of Joyenti Banerjee o.ps. came to know that those drafts were payable to her from the complainant and o.ps. gave clearance of those two drafts on being satisfied of the report of the Central Bank of India, Patuapara Branch without notice to the complainants.

            Decision with reasons:

            It is an admitted position that complainant purchased two drafts of Rs.90,000/- each which were lost on 12.3.08 at 8-00 p.m. and complainant lodged diary with Kalighat P.S. and on 13.3.08 by writing a letter to o.ps. advised ‘stop payment’ since those drafts lost by the complainant. It is also apparent from the record that o.ps. stop payment on receipt of the letter of the complainant and undertook investigation and advised Central Bank of India not to present those drafts for clearance pending investigation undertaken by o.ps. but surprisingly enough o.ps. made clearance of those two drafts beyond the knowledge of the complainant whilst complainant had lodged GDE and advised ‘stop payment’ by writing letter to o.ps. It is not understood how the o.ps. gave clearance of those drafts of Rs.1,80,000/- beyond the knowledge of the complainant in the facts and circumstances mentioned above. It is further apparent from the record that complainant took instant steps with the o.ps. as regards loss of drafts in question. It is natural on t he basis of the bank authority to appraise complainants prior clearance of the aforesaid drafts prior to giving clearance of those two drafts of Rs.90,000/- each to Joyenti Banerjee without ascertaining from the complainant as to whether said Joyenti Banerjee was the bona fide payee of the said two drafts amount from the complainant and even the o.ps. did not wait for the final report of the police investigation on the basis of GDE lodged by the complainant with Kalighat P.S. on 12.3.08 in such an important matter. It is the case of the complainant that he had lost the aforesaid two drafts in taxi and how it reached to Joyenti Banerjee and there leaves some room as regards deficiency on the part of the o.ps. towards its consumers / complainants and complainants are entitled to relief as prayed for.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees one lakh eighty thousand) only together with interest @ 5% p.a. from the date of issue and till the date of realization of the entire sum and further directed to pay compensation of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- to the complainants within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.

   _____Sd-_____                                                   _____Sd-_______

     MEMBER                                                           PRESIDENT