By Smt. Saji Mathew, Member:-
The gist of the complaint is as follows:- The Complainant is an account holder of the Opposite Party having account No.10738250641. On 6.12.2009 the Complainant presented a cheque for Rs.3,00,000/- issued to the Complainant by one Mr. Puttu Swamy drawn on his account at Karnataka Bank Muggey Branch for collection. After presenting the cheque, the Complainant approached Opposite Party several times for withdrawing the amount. On all such occasions, the Opposite Party used to say one or other excuses. Then the Opposite Party said that the cheque was misplaced and he will realize the amount soon after tracing out the cheque.
2. The Complainant waited for the amount till 31.05.2011. On 31.05.2011, the Opposite Party admitted to the Complainant that the cheque was lost from his custody and is not sent for collection. Due to the deficiency in service and negligence on the side of the Opposite Party, the Complainant suffered monetary loss and mental agony for which the Opposite Party is liable to compensate. Therefore the Complainant prays for an order directing the Opposite Party to pay the cheque amount of Rs.3,00,000/- with 12% interest from the date of cheque and to pay a compensation of Rs.5,000/-.
3. The Opposite Party filed version and admitted the presentation of cheque for Rs.3,00,000/- for collection by the Complainant. But it is not correct to say that it is lost from his custody. The cheque was duly sent for collection to the Karnataka Bank Ltd. But the said instrument was received back by the Opposite Party only on 20.6.2011. Before that the Opposite Party sent several letters enquiring about the fate of the cheque for which no reply was given. The reason for the delay of receiving back the instrument is not known to the Opposite Party. The cheque was returned for 3 reasons (1) Cheque is out of date. (2) Funds insufficient. (3) Joint holder not signed. So even if the cheque was returned to the Complainant in time, the remedy available to him is only to file a criminal complaint against the drawer of the Complainant. There is no deficiency in service on the side of the Opposite Party and the Complainant has not suffered any monetary loss. The Complainant can even now file criminal complaint against the drawer of the cheque. Therefore the Opposite party prays for the dismissal of the case.
4. The Complainant filed proof affidavit and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A5. The Opposite Party was examined as OPW1. Documents were marked as Exts.B1 to B3 on the side of the Opposite party.
5. The matters to be decided are as follows:-
Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the Opposite Parties?
Whether the Complainant is entitled to get any relief?
6. Point No.1:- The Opposite Party admit that the cheque was presented for collection before them. They state that the cheque was sent for collection the next day itself. Ext.B1 is the postage register kept them. Ext.B1 is not a conclusive evidence to show that the cheque was sent on 07.12.2010. OPW1 state that the cheque was sent through courier service. No courier receipt or acknowledgment receipt is produced. No effective or prompt enquiry is made about the fate of the cheque to the drawee bank. Ext. B2 is dated 21.03.2011, about three months after the presentation of the cheque. If the instrument was promptly sent, the enquiry should have been made earlier. One reason for return of the cheque is 'cheque is out of date'. It shows that when the cheque was received by the drawee bank, the karnataka bank, Magge branch, the cheque period was over. So there is deficiency in service and negligence on the side of the Opposite Party. Hence point No.1 is found accordingly.
7. Point No.2:- It is to be noted that the cheque was returned for 3 reasons (1) Cheque is out of date. (2) Funds insufficient. (3) Joint holder not signed. Over the 2nd and 3rd reasons the Opposite Party has no control or responsibility. The returned cheque and memo were handed over to the Complainant in time and he was left with legal remedies. More over even when the cheque is lost from the custody of the bank the consumer is not entitled to get the amount of cheque. He was entitled to have a reasonable compensation only. Here also, the Complainant is not entitled to the amount of cheque. But he is entitled to get a reasonable amount as compensation
Hence, the complaint is partly allowed and the Opposite Party is directed to give Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) as compensation to the Complainant within 30 days of the receipt of this order. The Opposite Party is also directed to give an interest on the ordered amount at rate of 9% from the date of this order till payment.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the day of 30th November 2011.
Date of filing:03.06.2011.
PRESIDENT: Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
MEMBER : Sd/-
/True Copy/
PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD.
A P P E N X I X
Witness for the Complainant:
Nil.
Witness for the Opposite Party:
OPW1. Sasidharan. Manager, State Bank of India, Kainatty.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of Cheque No.330571. dt:06.12.2010.
A2. Copy of Receipt. dt:06.12.2010.
A3. Copy of Memo. dt:24.06.2011.
A4. Copy of Memo. dt:15.06.2011.
A5. Copy of Cheque return Memo. dt:15.06.2011.
Exhibits for the Opposite Party:-
B1. Copy of Postage Book. dt:07.12.2010.
B2 series. Letter and Postal Receipt.
B3. Letter and Postal Receipt.
