O R D E R
K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant had an saving bank account bearing No.3073020100534789, with the O.P bank. It is alleged that the complainant deposited a cheque bearing No.000014 dated 30.09.2013 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110029, amounting of Rs.21,600/- for encashment on 28.12.2013. It is further alleged that the complainant was shocked to receive that the said cheque was returned with the remarks “Instrument Outdated/ Stale.” It is alleged that after various queries and confirmation it is concluded that the said cheque was presented by the complainant within stipulated period of 90 days and the same was not outdated/ stale on 28.12.2013 for presentation/ realization and there is no lapse on the part of complainant. It is further alleged that the return of the said cheque/ non realization by the O.P is illegal, unjustified and against the provision of law as contained/ defined under section 83 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. It is alleged that due to the aforesaid conduct of the O.P the complainant had suffered loss of amount of consideration of the said document of cheque No.000014. The complainant has also sent a legal notice dated 14.02.2014 but to no avail. On these facts complainant prays that O.P be directed to pay/return amount of Rs.43,200/- i.e. the double of the cheque amount, apart from cost and compensation as claimed.
2. O.P appeared and filed the written statement. In its written statement OP has not disputed that complainant had an saving bank account bearing No.3073020100534789, with the O.P bank. However, case of OP is that the complainant had deposited the cheque No.000014 for Rs.21,600/- dated 30.09.2013 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank with the O.P on 28.12.2013. The same was rejected on 30.12.2013 by the Kotak Mahindra Bank. It is alleged that the cheque was processed by O.P on 28.12.2013 the day when the same was deposited by complainant and sent for clearing to Kotak Mahindra. As 29.12.2013 was Sunday, therefore, it was presented to bank on 30.12.2013 as per the banking laws. It is further alleged that a cheque was valid for 3 months only from the date of issue accordingly this cheque was valid upto 30.12.2013 only and same was returned by Kotak Mahindra Bank on 30.12.2013 with a reason “Instrument Outdated/ Stale.” Therefore, returning of cheque was in order. Secondly, whenever a cheque was deposited for collection/ clearing the O.P is working as a collection agent and only passing of cheque as per banking norms is with the drawee bank only i.e. Kotak Mahindra Bank in the case. It is alleged that if there was any prejudice it must have been against the bank which has returned the cheque i.e. Kotak Mahindra Bank. Dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
3. Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence testifying all the facts made in the complaint. On the other hand Mr. Sudarshan Kumar Garg, Asstt. General Manager of O.P Bank has already filed affidavit in evidence on behalf of O.P Bank.
4. We have carefully gone through the record of the case and also heard submissions of Ld. Counsels for the parties.
5. In the instant case the dispute between parties is as to whether the cheque deposited by complainant with O.P bank on 28.12.2013 bearing No.000014 drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank dated 30.09.2013 for Rs.21,600/- for encashment on 28.12.2013 was wrongly returned with remarks “Instrument Outdated/ Stale.” The plea of O.P is that it processed the cheque for encashment on 28.12.2013 itself but due to Holiday falling on 29.12.2013 the cheque could reach the clearing bank i.e. Kotak Mahindra only on 30.09.2013 on which date the said bank returned the cheque with remarks “Instrument Outdated/ Stale.” Therefore, they were not at fault nor there was any deficiency on their part.
6. It is admitted case of the parties that the cheque in question dated 30.09.2013 was presented to the O.P bank on 28.12.2013 which was processed on the same day but reached the clearing bank i.e. Kotak Mahindra on 30.09.2013 as 29.12.2013 was Holiday. Ideally the bank takes three working days to clear the account payee cheque as per banking practice, whereas in the present case there were not three working days left with O.P to clear the cheque. Even Section 83 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 goes against the case of complainant.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the discussion stated above, we are of the view that there is absolutely no deficiency on the part of the O.P. Complaint is, therefore, rejected.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced this 15th day of December, 2015.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
