F.A. 650/2010  against C.C.  2772008,  Dist. Forum, Ongole.  

Between:

Andhra Bank,

Bank Street Branch

Ongole, Prakasham Dist.                            ***                           Appellant/

            O.P. No. 1.     

                                                                    And

1. V. Anjaneya Raju

S/o. Kotaj Raju

38  years, Advocate

6-214, Kurnool Road

Srinagar, Ongole.                                                 ***                         Respondent/

                                                                                                Complainant.  

2.  General Manager

Andhra Bank,

Head Office : 5-9-11

Saifabad, Hyderabad.                                 ***                         Respondent/

                                                                                                O.P. No. 2.

Counsel for the  Appellant:                         M/s.  K. Sridhar Rao

Counsel for the  Respondent:                     P.I.P.

CORAM:

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT.

                                                                   &

                                 SMT.M.SHREESHA, LADY MEMBER.
                                                         

THURSDAY, THIS THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND TEN

ORAL ORDER:  (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Appa Rao, President.)

***

1)                This is an appeal preferred by the opposite party bank  against the order of the Dist. Forum directing it to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- besides costs of Rs. 1,000/-. 

2)                The case of the complainant in brief is that  he is having a savings bank account with  the appellant bank.  Since there was change in his signature as the  account was very old, he requested the bank by filing an application  in   December, 2008  for change of specimen signature.    But there was no response from the bank.   There upon he complained to the  higher authorities  by way of e-mail.   Thereupon the bank manager invited him for change of specimen signature.    He along with his friend  went there on 

23.10.2008 where the manager  introduced one  Sri Ram Reddy, Inspector of the bank .  There upon the manager informed his colleague  that he was  the person who made complaint  by e-mail.    The branch manager advised him to fill in the application for change of specimen signature.  On that  he came out of his chamber and  fill up the form and  he approached the manager to give the application form, however   he abused him in a filthy language.    On that he filed a   private complaint, and intimated to  the higher officials.  No action was taken against him.  It became very  difficult for him to operate the bank account.   This incident caused mental agony  to him.   Therefore, he sought  change of  his specimen signature besides compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and costs. 

3)                 The appellant bank resisted the case.   While denying each and every allegation made by the complainant,   it admitted that the  complainant  is having a savings bank account with it.   At no time  the complainant had submitted  an application for change of specimen signature.  Even till date, no request was made  for change of specimen signature.    The procedure for change of specimen signature  has to be followed.    He had to sign before an officer which he did not make.    The complainant being a practicing advocate  resorted to  a criminal complaint.  He could not have filed  this complaint claiming compensation.    Therefore it prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.

4)                 The complainant in proof of his case filed his affidavit evidence and that of his friend    Mr. Bhumireddy Srinivasulu Reddy and got Exs. A1 photostat copy of pass book and  A2  photostat copy of  complaint  made to  customer  service  of appellant bank,   while the appellant filed the affidavit evidence of  its Branch Manager Sri  Mopuri  Dwarakanath Reddy.

5)                 The Dist. Forum after considering the evidence placed on record opined that  though there was no clear evidence  that the complainant gave an application for change of specimen signature on the date of alleged incident, however Ex. A2 e-mail would show that  he might have given such  application  and that the appellant bank failed to change his  specimen signature  which constitutes deficiency in service awarded Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation together with costs of Rs. 1,000/-. 

6)                Aggrieved  by the said decision,  the appellant bank preferred this appeal contending that  the Dist. Forum did not appreciate either facts or law in correct perspective.    Evidently, when the very complaint discloses that the signature was not made  in the presence of concerned official  and that there was  no proof that he submitted such an application the question of changing his specimen signature would not arise.   There is no evidence that  due to change of signature the bank had returned  or did not honour any of his cheques or  refused to pay the amounts to him.  There is no deficiency in service  on their part and therefore prayed that the complaint be dismissed by allowing the appeal. 

7)                The point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the Dist. Forum is vitiated by mis-appreciation of fact or law?

8)                It is an undisputed fact  that the complainant is having a savings bank account  with the appellant bank evidenced under Ex. A1.  Evidently  the complainant intends to change his specimen signature.  The complainant is a practicing advocate  at Ongole.   He alleges that he sent an application for change of his signature. When change was not made, it seems that  he sent a complaint through e-mail for not changing his specimen signature.    On that the branch manager  invited him and advised him to  fill up  an application with his signature  and as such he went  on 23.10.2008  along with his friend  and approached the branch manager.    It seems that the branch manager  complained to his colleague who was in his chamber  stating that  the complainant (he) was  the person  who gave a complaint  to higher ups, and on tht he abused him  in a filthy language.    Therefore, he had complained to the higher ups  by way of e-mail  and filed this complaint. 

9)                At the outset, we may state that the very  prayer of the complainant  was  to effect change of his specimen signature.  There is no proof that  earlier  he had submitted an application  for change of his  specimen signature.  There is no proof as to the date  when he submitted such an application.  Ex. A2 did not  mention that he submitted an application for change of his specimen signature.    The so called complaint through e-mail  to the higher officials  for not responding  for change of his specimen signature  as alleged in Ex. A2   was not even filed.    As we have earlier pointed out that there is no proof that   he had complained against the branch manager.    According to him on 23.10.2008  when he approached the branch manager for change of his signature at that time he introduced to one  Sri Ram Reddy  who was the inspector of banks  and showed him and complained to him stating that  he was the person  who made a complaint by e-mail  to higher ups and so saying he abused him and on that he was shocked and had no words, and therefore he sought for action against the manager.     

10)              A perusal of Ex. A2  discloses that  he went to  the appellant branch  on 23.10.2008.  He did not allege that  his friend had accompanied him.  Obviously this was introduced in order to strengthen his case.  Had he been accompanied him he would not have omitted to mention his name.   Apart from it  when he sent e-mail,  he did not mention that he  took the  application from the bank manager, went out and signed  before the concerned officer and gave it to him.

11)               It is not the case of the complainant that he had submitted an  application  for  change of  specimen  signature   by getting it attested  in  the presence of any officer.  When he was asked to do so, there is no reason why he should go out  in order to sign on the application.     Assuming without admitting  that he signed on it, there is no proof that  it was given by the complainant to the bank manager for effecting change of his specimen signature.    Till today, he did not given his specimen signature attested by the officer of the bank in order to effect change.  Obviously as we could see  that there was some exchange of words or some  unsavory    incident  that took place which led the complainant  to file the complaint.   The complainant already complained against his banker before the Magistrate.    

12)              As far as deficiency in service is concerned, we do not see any deficiency in service on the part of the bank  nor there is any proof that  he had given application  seeking change of his specimen signature.    

13)              As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant,  that  at no time either  cheques or any of the transactions  were declined on the ground that there was change  in signature.    Had there been any such  evidence, it  could  have been  undoubtedly held that  there was deficiency in service  on the part of the bank.    When the complainant could not prove that he  submitted an application  as per rules for effecting change of specimen signature we do not see any deficiency in service on the part of the bank.      Obviously to settle personal scores he filed this complaint.  It cannot be  said that there is vicarious liability  in regard to these acts  mulcting amounts against the bank.   We do not subscribe to the opinion of the Dist. Forum in stating that there is deficiency in service on the part of the bank.    There are no merits in the complaint.

14)               In the result the appeal is allowed setting  aside the order of the Dist. Forum.  Consequently the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

1)       _______________________________

PRESIDENT                 

2)      ________________________________

 MEMBER          

   Dt.  29.  07.  2010.

*pnr

“UP LOAD – O.,K.”