Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) The petitioners have sought a direction upon the respondent no. 2 to credit the account of the first petitioner with a sum of Rs.60 Lakhs being the value of 11 several cheques.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that, the first petitioner has an account with the respondent no. 2. The first petitioner had deposited 11 several cheques of one L.B. Enterprises drawn on Gandhidham Co-operative Bank of Kutch, Gujarat is aggregating to a sum of Rs.60 Lakhs with the respondent no. 2 for collection. Neither the proceeds of any of these 11 cheques were deposited in the accounts of the first petitioner nor any of those cheques returned to the petitioners by the bank. Five cheques were deposited by the first petitioner on May 6, 2015. Six cheques were deposited on May 16, 2015. By a letter dated June 10, 2015, the petitioners had requested the respondent no. 2 to credit the proceeds of these cheques. The petitioners, however, received an e-mail from the respondent no. 6 informing the petitioners that, the cheques were returned and sent to the respondent no. 2 by Speed Post on June 3, 2015. The respondent no. 2 was immediately requested to hand over the cheques physically to the petitioners. However, the cheques were not made over to the petitioners. The petitioners were ultimately informed that, the cheques were lost. The petitioners had approached the Banking Ombudsman by a writing dated June 29, 2016, the Banking Ombudsman had refused to exercise its jurisdiction. Since the complaint to the Banking Ombudsman was closed under clause 13(c) of the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006, the same is not appealable. The respondent no. 2 having acted negligently, the petitioners are entitled to the proceeds of the 11 several cheques from the respondent no. 2.
(3.) Learned Advocate for the petitioners has relied upon a circular dated November 4, 2011 issued by the Reserve Bank of India to All Scheduled Commercial Banks. Referring to such circular he has submitted that, the period of validity of the cheques were reduced from 6 months to 3 months by such circular. He has submitted that, the respondent no. 2 by its action has denied the petitioners' valuable right of approaching the Court under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It had allowed a period in excess of 3 months to elapse from the date of presentation of the cheques till the information as to the loss of the cheques being supplied. The petitioners had received an intimation on August 17, 2015 by which time a period of 6 months had elapsed.;