Judgment : Dt. 30.1.2018
Mrs. Balaka Chatterjee, Member
This petition of complaint is filed under section 12 of C.P.Act, 1986, by Sanjoy Sharma alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party
1. The Manager, Bank Of India Alipore Branch
2. THE ZONAL MANAGER, Bank Of India, Zonal Office
3. THE MANAGER, ICICI Bank, Gurusaday Road Branch
Case of the complainant in brief is that being desirious to avail loan the Complainant approached the OP No.3/ICICI Bank Ltd. who being approached sent their representatives namely Anupama Das, Manoj Jadav and Pratap Singh to the Complainant to assist him for availing loan from the said Bank. The Complainant has further stated that the said representatives had collected various documents for Identity Proof, residential proof, Bank account document, etc. along with two cancelled cheques bearing Nos.000034 and 000036 of the Bank of India, which the Complainant on good faith handed over to them along with application form signed by him. It is stated by the Complainant that after few days he received a phone call from the ICICI Bank informing him that he would be availing a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- shortly. It is further stated by the Complainant that on 2.6.2015 he received a message in his phone from his Banker viz. Bank of India, Alipore Branch, Kolkata-700 027 that a sum of Rs.75,000/- has been debited from the said account using one of the cancelled cheques viz. bearing No.000034 which was handed over to representatives of ICICI Bank on 01.06.2015. The Complainant further stated that he promptly informed the said matter to the Manager of the OP No.1 but the Manager did not entertain that complaint and the Complainant lodged written complaint with the Zonal Manager, Bank of India and the Manager, Bank of India, Alipore Branch through registered speed post dt.17.6.2016 but to no effect. The Complainant also stated that on 2.6.2015 he visited the said Bank and wanted to see the cheque being No.000034 but was refused and thereafter he took the matter before the Ombudsman but the Ombudsman vide order dt.8.9.2016 refused to entertain the complaint and subsequently, as he filed an appeal before Reserve Bank of India, Head Office, Mumbai on 16.08.2016 no fruitful result was yielded. Hence, the Complainant has filed the instant case, praying for direction upon OP No.1 to refund the entire amount of Rs.75,000/- along with interest @ 18% p.a., to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation and to pay cost of litigation.
The Complainant annexed following documents to the petition of complaint
- Photocopy of PAN CARD issued in favour of the Complainant.
- Photocopy of Voter ID of the Complainant.
- Photocopy of Profession Tax Acknowledgement Receipt and Challan issued in the name of the Company being M/s Krishna Furniture House.
- Photocopy of the two cancelled cheques being No.000034 and 000036 of the Bank of India, Alipore Branch, Kolkata-700 027, containing IFS Code and Account No. etc.
The OP Bank of India filed written version denying and disputing all material allegations leveled against them paragraphwise stating inter alia that the Complainant with a fraudulent motive and in connivance with the interested person of the said ICICI Bank withdrew the said amount since the Complainant deposited the said two purported cheques with his signature which was against the norms and rules. Accordingly, the OP, Bank of India, prayed dismissal of the instant case with exemplary cost.
The ICICI Bank Ltd. also filed written version denying all material allegation stating that the said Bank had no idea regarding sanction of loan to the Complainant and as all allegations have been made against the OP No.1 and, therefore, the OP No.3 need not pass any comment.
In course of argument Ld. Advocate for the Complainant drew the attention of this Forum to the photocopy of the Cheques bearing nos. 000034 & 000036. Ld Advocate for the Complainant submitted that even the Bank of India did not initiate any internal enquiry to redress the grievance of the Complainant.
Ld Advocate on behalf of OP No 3 submitted that no relief had been sought against OP No. 3 and accordingly prayed for dismissal of the case against him.
Ld. Advocate on behalf of OP Nos. 1& 2 submitted that the Complainant had not raised any question against ICIC Bank whereas the purported loan documents against which the cancelled cheques were handed over, was prayed before the Complainant by those persons who claimed to be the employee of ICICI Bank.
Points for determination
- Whether the Complainant is a consumer under the OP Nos. 1 & 2.
- Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.
Decision with reasons
All points are taken up together for comprehensive discussion and decision. The Complainant being an account holder under the Bank of India has become consumer under the OP Nos.1 & 2. OP No.3 has been impleaded as necessary party to the instant case.
It is the specific allegation of the Complainant that the Bank of India has disbursed an amount of Rs.75,000/- honouring a cheque being No.000034 which has been handed over to some other person as cancelled cheque for availing loan. On scrutiny of the photocopy of the said cheques it appears that the payee of the said cheque is ICICI Bank and thereon by putting X sign the Complainant put no number or digit in the said cheques as regards the payable amounts.
On further scrutiny of the photocopy of passbook regarding statement of accounts, it appears that on 02.06.2015 Rs.75,000/- has been disbursed to one Raju Das by the Bank of India, Alipore Branch.
The main contention of the OP, Bank of India is that the Complainant although claims to have handed over the said cheque(s) as cancelled cheque for availing loan but he has put his signature therein which is not required for a cancelled cheque and this act on the part of the Complainant proves the nexus with the persons who have withdrawn the said amount. But this contention is not sustainable as any cheque without containing the amount for withdrawal can be passed even to a different person whose name has not been written as payee on the said cheque.
Now, the moot point is whether the Bank is to honour a cheque by debiting such hefty amount in favour of a person whose name is not even written In the said cheque.
In this context, we rely upon the decision of Hon’ble NCDRC reported in 1995 I CPR(NC) 204 [State Bank of India v. Jain Irrigation System Ltd.] decided on 19.12.1994,
Wherein their Lordships pleased to hold that the Bank has been negligent in passing the cheque without taking proper care and caution.
In the instant case, we are also of opinion that the OP/ Bank of India erred in disbursing the said amount of Rs.75,000/- to such a person whose name was not written in the said cheque nor the payable amount was written therein which is a clear example of deficiency in service.
Since the OP, Bank of India, debited Rs.75,000/- from the account of the Complainant unjustifiably they are to make good for the same with interest. Since the OP Bank of India compelled the Complainant to file the case they are liable to bear the cost of litigation which according to us will be just and proper if an amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded for cost of litigation.
No relief is sought against ICICI Bank, therefore the instant case is dismissed against them.
In the result the complaint succeeds in part.
Hence,
ordered
That CC/217/2017 is allowed on contest with cost against the OP No.1 & 2 and dismissed without cost against OP No.3.
The OP Nos.1 & 2 are directed to credit Rs.75,000/- to the Complainant’s account bearing No. 407620110000050 with interest @ 8% p.a. to be calculated on till the date of realization within one month from the date of this order.
The OP Nos. 1 & 2 are also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant towards cost of litigation within aforesaid period. Liability of the OP Nos.1 & 2 are joint and several.
Considering the circumstances no order as to compensation is passed.
