Judgment On 07.03.2007
Present:- Sri B.K. Samanta, President
Sri Kumar Mukhopadhyay, Member
Smt. Jyotsna Sarkar, Member
This is a case for compensation
The complainant’s case briefly stated is that the complainant is a small businessman. He was sanctioned a loan of Rs.30,000/- on 24.02.2003 by the Mallabhum Gramin Bank(Jassora Branch) to maintain his livelihood by self-employment against Term Deposit no. 5508 as per letter dt. 24.02.2003. issued to the complainant by the Bank. Hence, the complainant is a consumer to the Bank. The Loan passbook bearing A/C No. CD/OD-3 has been issued to the complainant on 24.02.2003. The complainant deposited a sum of Rs.8,000/- only by cash on 12.10.2004 to pay off the balance of his loan as posted on 11.11.2004 by the bank. The concerned clerk had set the whole amount of Rs.8,000/- to the credit of the complainant and posted the same amount in the prescribed column of the loan pass book as well as updated the account on 12.10.2004. In the middle of Jan, 2005, the Manager of the Bank called the complainant and told him to refund the amount of Rs.8,000/- because this amount was wrongly credited to the complainant’s account instead of one of the Staff’s account. A voucher of the same amount was shown to the complainant. As the pass book was updated and 3 months passed off after the said deposit. The complainant did not feel any necessity to preserve the counter part of the cash receipt of Rs.8,000/- Several written representations vide letters dt. 28.03.2005, 06.04.2005 were sent to the Authorities for the bank by the complainant himself. The OP sent a letter dt. 102.07.2005 admitting the mistake/error to which no blame can be imposed on the complainant. But the blame was impose for sending representations to the Bank and the complainant has to regularize the said account within 20.07.2005, otherwise the bank authority will adjust the loan amount with the term deposit. The OP No.3 sent a letter dt. 25.07.2005 admitting the above mentioned wrong entry claiming it as a clerical mistake. Also the account has been regularized by the bank without giving any reasonable opportunity to the complainant. There is a duty case upon the concerned clerk and concerned officials jointly to maintain accounts with efficiency and without any error. The OP took three months time to rectify the single clerical erred. The Bank has rectified their mistake in the Pass Book on 24.01.2005 while the interest up to 31.12.2004 has been rectified on 12.02.2005 i.e. after 18 days from the date of previous rectification. Such type of negligent and whimsical services as provided by the bank is a deficient one which put the complainant in a great deal of inconvenience, harassment, financial loss and mental agony from the month of Jan. ’05 for which he is entitled to get compensation. The complainant has to be paid by the bank an amount of Rs.1 lakh as compensation for causing inconvenience, harassment, financial loss, mental agony, legal and other expenses. Under the circumstances, the complainant prays for compensation as described in para-11 o his complaint and any other relief or reliefs.
The case was contested by the OPs by filling a written statement wherein they denied the material allegation of the case and also stated that it is false that complainant deposited Rs.8,000/- or any amount by cash on 12.10.2004 to pay off the balance of his loan as posted on 11.11.2004. It is also false that the concerned clerk had set the whole amount of Rs.8,000/- to the credit of the complainant and posted the same amount. The cash receipt of Rs.8,000/- had been issued from the cash deposit counter of the bank on the same very date i.e. 12.10.2004. The complainant did not deposit any loans amount in A/c No. CD/OD-03 amounting Rs.8,000/-. On the same day, Sri Amar Nath Bhattacharyay deposited Rs.8,000/-. To his loan AC COD-03. The cashier received the amount and entered into the cash book putting the Sl. No. on the body of the voucher as there was o pay-in-slip i.e. deposit slip in the name of Mr. Dhara. Due to mistake of the ledger keeper, the amount of Rs.8,000/- has been credited to the loan A/C of Sri Dhara instead of on loan A/c of Sri Amar Nath Bhattacharyya. The ledger keeper wrongly credited the amount in CD/OD A/C No. 03 instead of COD A/C-03 due to oversight. Style of both A/C was almost same and A/C No. in both A/cs are exactly same. But when on 18.10.2004 Sri Dhara deposited to the credit of the bank in his loan A/c, the sid Rs.8,000/- was made entry in the loan A/C of Sri Dhara, it is purely a clerical mistake and it has been come to the notice of the Bank Authority during periodical check up by the A/C officer. It will be evident from entry of the pass book of Sri Dhara that the entry of Rs.8,000/- was made on 18.10.2004. No entry has ever been made on that date i.e. 12.10.2004. Had Sri Dhara ever deposited the amount in his A/C Rs.8,000/- on 12.10.2004, obviously that amount will be credited on the said date and money receipt slip will be handed over against the said amount. Mr. Dhara is requested to show the money receipt dt. 12.10.2004, which is fervently prayed to show the genuineness of the deposit but he did not care even. Under the circumstances, the OP prays for accepting his written objection.
Points for decision
On the basis of above pleadings by the parties, the following points are taken up for consideration.
- Is the case maintainable?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the OP?
- Is the complainant entitled to have any relief as prayed for?
DECISIONS
Point No.1. It is admitted by the OP that the complainant had a loan account with him. So admittedly, it can be said that the complainant is a consumer under the OP and the complainant is entitled to have relief, if there is any laces on the part of the OP. So the case is maintainable in its present form.
Point No.2- It is the case of the complainant that he has deposited a sum of Rs.8,000/- with the OP on 12.10.2004 to pay off part of his loan and necessary entry was made in the passbook to this effect. In the middle of Jan. ‘2005, the Manager of the Bank told him to refund Rs.8,000/- as this was wrongly credited to his account. As the matter was brought to his notice after a lapse of 3 months, the complainant did not feel the necessity to preserve the counter part of the pay-in-slip. On the other hand the OP has claimed that the amount was actually deposited by one Sri Amar Nath Bhattacharyay. The amount was credited to the account of the complainant by mistake and produced a copy of the cash voucher to substantiate their claim.
The complainant through prays for compensation Rs.1 lakh due to deficiency in service on the part of the Op, but he has not asked for refund o fRs.8,000/- which he claimed to have deposited by cash on 12.10.2004. So admittedly, the complainant has accepted the submission of the OP. In such circumstances, we are not inclined to enter into further discussion regarding this matter i.e. refund of money Rs.8,000/- if any.
It is a fact that there was mistake on the part of the OP which is no doubt deficiency in service on their part. However, there is no denying the fact that man is err. Therefore, if we take a practical view we would find that inadvertent mistake/error may happen at times. It is, nevertheless, advisable that Authorities be extremely cautious in their approach and shows zero tolerance to any kind of mistake/error as this causes inconvenience to others. Considering the above facts we find that though it is deficiency in service, yet it is inadvertent in nature, which requires to be taken liberally.
Point No.3. On the basis of foregoing discussions and materials on record, we are of opinion that the complainant is entitled to have compensation to some extent for such deficiency in service on the part of the OP.
Hence, Ordered
That the case be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP. The complainant is entitled to have compensation Rs.500/- from the OP for deficiency in service on their part. The OP is directed to pay the same by one month from this date failing which the complainant can have the same by way of execution through this forum after expiry of such period.
