STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. P.UDAY KUMAR
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
STATE BANK OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
D.APPA RAO, J. -
(1.) THESE appeals are preferred one by the complainant against inadequacy of compensation and the other by the opposite party against the order of the Dist. Forum -I, Hyderabad in granting compensation.
The parties are described as arrayed in the complaint in order to obviate confusion in describing the parties.
(2.) THE case of the complainant in brief is that, he was having S.B. account with the respondent bank. He issued two cheques, one for Rs. 9,000 in favour of Sri Dayakar Reddy and another for Rs. 5,000 in favour of Smt. B. Jalaja towards rent and service charges payable by him for the apartment occupied by him. They were presented for payment on 9.9.2005, however, returned unpaid on the ground that funds were insufficient. In fact he was having pass book balance of Rs. 17,943 from 5.9.2003 to 14.9.2005. This has resulted in loss of reputation. He is a Company Secretary in Republic Forge Company and number of other reputed companies. Since the opposite party failed to render service as required, it constitutes deficiency in service. Therefore, he prayed for Rs. 1,00,000 towards compensation for loss of reputation and costs.
(3.) THE respondent bank filed counter denying the facts alleged in the complaint. While admitting that the complainant was having S.B. account with it, denied that those cheques were issued towards rent and services charges for the apartment occupied by him. It alleged that those cheques were presented in clearing on 9.9.2005 with UTI Bank and returned with reasons -insufficient funds'. The complainant tendered a cheque on 5.9.2005 for Rs. 15,000 to credit into his account and was sent for clearing and the bank was expected to receive it on 9.9.2005. As on 5.9.2005 the balance in his account was Rs. 2,943.11 evident from banks cheques referred and returned register Ex. B2. The complainant has issued the cheques in anticipation of funds.
As per the clearing norms, cheques are to be returned by 11.30 a.m. and further release of day's credit is done simultaneously which is processed at Belapur and credits are posted into accounts. On the material date the credits were received after the return of cheques, though the pass book entry reflects credit of Rs. 15,000 raising the balance to Rs. 17,943.11 but Rs. 15,000 will be in un -cleared balance till 9.9.2005. Since the pass book entries were printed after 9.9.2005 an amount of Rs. 15,000 was not reflected as un -cleared. The pass book clearly shows the entry dated21.9.2005 for Rs. 2,500 the resultant balance has increased to Rs. 18,056.61, simultaneously the amounts of Rs. 15,556.61 and Rs. 2,500 as un -cleared balance. Therefore, the system will allow drawings up to Rs. 15,556.61 only and not Rs. 18,056.61. From this it is clear that by the time of return of cheques the balance in the account was only Rs. 2,943.11. He being an ex -bank official he himself knows the clearing process and issue of cheques. They cannot be cleared in anticipation of funds. Moreover, the complainant was negligent while depositing the cheques of other banks, without the name of the payee and the date. The cheques were returned on 9.9.2005 as there was no sufficient balance. The question of losing of reputation will not arise since the cheques were presented at the opposite party bank even before realization of Rs. 15,000. The cheques were returned by 11.30 a.m. Thus there is no deficiency in service and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. The complainant in proof of his case filed his affidavit and Exs. A1 to A10. The respondent bank filed the affidavit of its officer and marked Exs. B1 to B6.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.