ARAWALI SHETRIYA GRAMEEN BANK Vs. BHAG CHAND JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant bank against order dated 10.12.2007 passed by the District Forum, Sawaimadhopur in complaint No. 172/2006 by which the complaint of the complainant respondents was allowed against the appellant bank in the manner that the appellant was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 18,000 as amount of the two cheques along with interest @ 9% p.a. to the complainant respondents and further to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000 as amount of compensation and Rs. 2,000 as costs and if the amount was not paid within two months the rate of interest would be 12% p.a.

(2.) IT arises in the following circumstances That the complainant respondents had filed a complaint before the District Forum, Sawaimadhopur on 26.6.2006 inter alia stating that they had issued two cheques on 11.4.2006 bearing Nos. 651808 and 687950 payable to the ICICI Bank and both cheques were issued for a sum of Rs. 9,000 each and they were handed over to one Sunil Kumar and these cheques were to be presented before the appellant bank for encashment. It was further stated that separate applications were filed by the complainant respondents before the appellant bank on 21.4.2006 inter alia stating that due to some misunderstanding the payment of these cheques be not made to the person in whose favour the cheques were issued and prayer for stop payment was made. It was further stated that in spite of the request for stop payment, the payment of the above two cheques was made by the appellant bank to ICICI Bank on 24.4.2006. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the bank and for that deficiency the complaint was filed. A reply was filed by the appellant Bank on 17.8.2006 and in the reply it was stated that in the cheques the payment was to be made to the ICICI Bank but in the applications in which prayer was made for stop payment I.C.I.C.l.C. was mentioned as there was difference between the two and, therefore, it could not be said that payment had been made wrongly by the appellant bank and thus there was no deficiency in service on the part of the appellant bank and it was prayed that complaint be dismissed. After hearing the parties, the learned District Forum, Sawaimadhopur through impugned order dated 10.12.2007 had allowed the complaint of the complainants inter alia holding that there was deficiency in service on the part of the appellant as after receiving the applications for stop payment, the payment was made by the appellant bank to the ICICI Bank and thus the appellant bank was directed to pay the amount of the cheques apart from the amount of compensation as stated above. Agrieved from the said order passed by the District Forum, Sawaimadhopur this appeal has been filed by the appellant bank.

(3.) IN this appeal the learned Counsel for the appellant has raised following contentions: