This Complaint coming up before us for hearing on 20-12-11 in the presence of Sri K. Krishna Murthy, advocate for the complainant and of Sri M. Sravan Kumar, advocate for opposite party, upon perusing the material on record and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-

The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking a sum of Rs.1,55,000/- together with interest @24% p.a., from 22-03-10 on wards and Rs.50,000/- as compensation and for costs.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are hereunder:

        The complainant is having account with the opposite party bank bearing No.400601010011289 since ten years.  On 22-03-10 the complainant deposited Rs.1, 55,000/- into his account for which the opposite party issued counter foil.  The complainant later went to the opposite party bank with an intention to withdraw amount from his account and learnt that the said amount was not credited to his account.  After knowing it the complainant approached the opposite party regarding the same.  The opposite party did not respond properly and abused the complainant.   The complainant gave notice to the opposite party on 26-04-11 requiring to pay the amount.   The opposite party though received notice kept quite.   The conduct of the opposite party amounted to deficiency of service and it caused mental agony.  The complaint estimated the same at Rs.50, 000/-.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3.   The contention of the opposite party in brief is thus:

        The complainant never deposited Rs.1, 55,000/- on 22-03-10 with the opposite party.   The date and amount on the alleged counter foil is not correct.   The complainant manipulated the counter foil and filed this case to have wrongful gain.  On 22-03-11 the complainant deposited Rs.55,000/-.  The complainant manipulated the year and amount on counter foil and made it as 22-03-10 and putting “1” before Rs.55,000/-, and wrote the amount in words which were not found in the voucher held with the bank.  The act of the complainant amounted to cheating.   The opposite party gave reply to the complainant on              21-05-11.  On 22-03-10 the complainant withdrew Rs.29, 000/-.   Rest of the allegations contra mention in the complaint are all false and are invented by the complainant to suit his claim.  The complaint therefore be dismissed.

4.   Exs.A-1 to A5 and Ex.B-1 to B-3 on behalf of the complainant and               opposite party were marked respectively.

5.    Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:

1. Whether the complainant deposited Rs.1, 55,000/- on             22-03-10?
2. Whether the opposite party committed deficiency of service?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation?
4. To what relief?

6.    POINTS 1&2:-   The complainant having account with the opposite party is not in dispute.   Likewise the complainant issuing notice to the opposite party is also not in dispute.   The complainant in order to substantiate his contention filed Ex.A-1 contending it as counterfoil while the opposite party filed Ex.B-3 repelling Ex.A-1. 

7.   The date appearing on the bank seal of Ex.A-1 representing the year is incomplete i.e., the year was not completely found on it.   The date appearing on Ex.B-3 voucher was 22-03-11.   This Forum has to ascertain whether Ex.A-1 is part and parcel of Ex.B-3. 

8.   Ex.A-5 is original of Ex.A-4.   A perusal of entries in Ex.A-5 leads us to draw an impression that he has neither withdrawn nor deposited any amount during 18-07-09 – 15-03-11 with the opposite party.   On the other hand, the opposite party filed ledger extract (Ex.B-2) duly signed.   Ex.B-2 revealed that the complainant made deposits and withdrew amounts during 18-07-09 - 15-03-11.   It is not the case of the complainant also that he had not transacted either by way of deposit or withdrawal during 18-07-09 – 15-03-11.   On seeing Ex.B-2 and Ex.A-5 we are of the opinion that the complainant did not take the pass book while withdrawing the amount or depositing the amount during 18-07-09 – 15-03-11.   The subject transaction took place on 22-03-10 according to the complainant.   The relevant portion in  Ex.A-3 notice is extracted below for better appreciation:

                “I am having savings bank account No.11289 in your branch since more than ten years and maintaining the same properly.  In that process, on 22-03-10 paid an amount of Rs.1,55,000/- into my S.B. Account and copy of relevant counterfoil is enclosed herewith for your kind reference.   After some days, I enquired about the balance in my account in Bank.   The concerned person findout the same and told the amount.   Then, I shocked about that balance amount and questioned about the entry of amount of Rs.1,55,000/- into my account which was paid by me on  22-03-10.   The concerned person simply replied that we will verify and also rectify the mistake.   From April, 2010 onwards I enquired number of times and also met with you and enquired about the above said amount.   But in vain.   Till today, you did not pay any interest to solve the problem which is causing financial loss to me”. 

9.     The relevant portion in the complaint is extracted below for better appreciation:

        “Later the complainant went to the opposite party bank with an intention to withdraw the amount from his account and later it came to know that the complaint that the amount which was deposited on 22-03-10 for a sum of Rs.1,55,000/- was not credited into his account.  After knowing the said fact, the complainant approached to the Branch Manager and questioned about the deposit amount.  The Branch Manager did not respond properly and abused him in filthy language even though without consider that that complainant is an advocate”.

10.   The averments mentioned in the complaint and in Ex.A-3 notice are contradicting about the demands of the complainant with the opposite party regarding Ex.A-1 and the opposite party protracting the matter.  The mere stoic silence by the complainant for about a year in issuing notice to the opposite party created a doubt in the minds of the Forum.  The complainant is a practicing advocate at Chilakaluripet.  No prudent person will keep quite till such a long period if the response of the opposite party was improper. 

11.   The date stamp of the opposite party appearing on Ex.A-1 separated the letters ‘fi’ and ‘ve’ in the word “five”.   Ex.A-1 prima facie leads us to drawn an impression that the word ‘five’ was written subsequent to affixing the date stamp.   On seeing Ex-A1 one can easily come to conclusion that the figure ‘1’ was subsequently inserted in view of the difference of ink between the figures‘ 1’ and ‘55000’ appearing in Rs.1,55,000/-. Like wise the name of the complainant, the amount in words, the date “22-03-10” and Chilakaluripet” were not written by one and the same person on seeing Ex.A-1.  The contention of the opposite party about manipulating Ex.A-1 is thus prima facie corroborated. The enquiry contemplated under CP Act is of summary nature.     We therefore opine that the opposite party did not commit any deficiency of service and answer these points against the complainant.

12.  POINT No.3:- The complaint is not entitled to any compensation in view of findings on points 1 & 2. We there fore answer this point against the complainant.

13.  POINT No.4:- In view of findings on points 1 to 3, in the result the complaint is dismissed without costs. 

        Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 28^th day of              December, 2011.

MEMBER                                             MEMBER                                             PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite party:

                                                                                                                        PRESIDENT