By. Sri. K. Gheevarghese, President:-
The complaint filed against the opposite party for the dishonour of cheque though the fund was sufficient in the account of the opposite party bank.
2. The complaint in brief is as follows: The complainant is an account holder in the opposite party bank who deposited Rs.6,000/- to honor the post dated cheques already issued to Sundaram finance of a Maruthi Suzuki Alto car as the payment towards the 3rd installment. The complainant credited Rs.6,000/- on 10.06.2011 at about 10 AM. The credited amount was also entered in the passbook. On the same day cheque presented by Sundaram finance was dishonoured for the reason of fund insufficient. The financier levied Rs.330/- as the cheque bouncing charge from the complainant and the complainant had to remit that amount. In an another occasion which was on 12.09.2011 Rs.5,750/- was credited into the account of the complainant but the account number was mistakenly described as 1061 instead of 1461. The bank received the amount and entered in the passbook and the counterfoil of pay in slip was also given to the remitter. When the financier presented the cheque for collection which was dishonoured for the reason of fund insufficient. Rs.280/- was charged to be paid by the complainant for the dishonour of the cheque though the account of the complainant was equipped with sufficient sum to honour the cheque presented. The negligence of the opposite party resulted dishonour of the cheque. The good relation of the complainant with the financier turned to be worse and financier lost faith on complainant. There may be an order directing the opposite party to pay the complainant Rs.610/- as the cheque returned charges collected from the complainant by the finance company along with compensation of Rs.25,000/- towards the mental agony and hardships, and cost of Rs.2,000/-.
3. The opposite party filed version in short it is as follows: The complainant maintains a Savings Bank account in the opposite party bank No.1461. The cheque No.202740 dated 10.06.2011 by sundaram finance was presented and it was returned due to insufficiency of fund. The complainant remitted Rs.6,000/- subsequently on 10.06.2011 and presented cheque. An another cheque No.476628 dated 10.09.2011 was presented on 15.09.2011 for collection Rs.5,750/- was credited in to the account of the complainant on 12.09.2011. The slip of remittance itself shows that the amount was credited in to the account No.1061 and it was later rectified. The complaint filed is not based on reason. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Hence this complaint to be dismissed with cost to the opposite party.
4. The points in considerations are:-
1. Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
2. Relief and Cost.
5. Points No.1 and 2 : The evidence in this case consist of the proof affidavit of the complainant. Ext.A1 to A7 and B1 to B7 are the documents produced. Oral testimony of the complainant is also considered.
6. The complainant's case is that opposite party dishonoured the cheque presented by the financier who had earlier issued the post dated cheques towards the EMI of vehicle finance.
The complainant was forced to pay the charges for the dishonoured cheques. Ext.A1 is the copy of the passbook of the complainant. The entry in Ext.A1 dated 10.06.2011 consists of the credit of Rs.6,000/- and the same amount was debited on 18.06.2011. According to the opposite party there was not sufficient amount in the account of the complainant when the cheque was presented by the financier consequently the cheque was bounced. The subsequent remittance in to the account of the complainant was on 12th September Rs.5,750/- was credited in to the account. The case of the complainant is that the subsequent payment of Rs.5,750/- credited in to the account of the complainant and entry of the amount in the passbook is also there. The remittance of this amount towards his account is made by a relative who wrote account number mistakenly as 1061. However amount was credited into the account of the complainant. The opposite party on production of the cheque by the financier Sundaram finance dishonoured this cheque also. The contentions of the opposite party is that though the amount Rs.5,750/- was credited in to the account of the complainant the mistake of the account number in the payment slip caused the dishonour of the cheque presented. It is evidenced from the documents produced by the complainant that Sundaram finance the financier charged an extra amount of Rs.280/- and Rs.330/- which are marked as Ext.A6 and A7 respectively.
7. The opposite party produced documents and Ext.B6 is the transaction log dated 10.06.2011. The taxation No.137 shows the transaction of Rs.6,000/- and taxation No.138 also shows the transaction of Rs.6,000/-. The taxation No.137 and 138 are in same time that is written at 12.46 PM. It is not clear from the documents produced by the opposite party whether the cheque presented for collection was in such a time when there was not sufficient amount in the account of the complainant to honour the cheque. The cheque presented subsequently by the financier also get dishonoured. Ext.B2 is the pay in slip dated 12.09.2011 the account number written in this slip 1061 instead of 1461. The opposite party is also responsible to inform the payee when it is found that the account number is different. However the amount is credited in to the account of the complainant. The mistake of the account number in the pay in slip can also be considered a reason for rejection of the payment but in this case amount of Rs.5,750/- is credited in to the account of the complainant. It is clear from the documents produced by the complainant that the complainant has to pay the penal fees for the dishonouring of the cheque. For which the opposite party is responsible. There is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in the transaction of the cheques presented.
8. The complainant has not produced any documents to establish the contention that apart from the penal charges the financier lost the faith of the complainant in further deal.
From the above inferences the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.610/- ( Rupees Six Hundred and Ten Only) to the Complainant the cheque returned charges collected from the complainant by the financier. The complainant is also to be compensated with Rs.1,000/- ( Rupees One Thousand Only) towards the cost and compensation. This Order is to be complied by the opposite party within one month from the date of receipt.
Pronounced in Open Forum on this the day of 27th February 2012.
Date of Filing:10.11.2011.
