M.THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The opposite parties 1 to 3 are the appellants.
(2.) Facts leading to the subject, in brief: The 1st respondent, in this appeal, who is the complainant had an account with the 4th opposite party bearing No.006 1503 10875059. For the transaction the complainant had with the 7th opposite party, he had drawn a cheque, in their favour for RS.35,638/- on 31.3.2006, which was sent to them, by courier, through 1st opposite party, which is controlled by the opposite parties 2 and 3. The 2nd opposite party, who was expected to deliver the cover, lost the same, thereby, failed to deliver, which landed in the hands of somebody, who had struck the name of 7th opposite party, wrote his name, and encashed the cheque, which was passed by the 4th opposite party, not taking proper care, thereby committing deficiency. Thus the opposite parties 1 to 6 having committed negligent act, deficiency in service, failed to rectify the same, despite notice, and therefore they should be directed to pay, not only the cheque amount, but also a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards compensation, in addition to cost of RS.5000/-, totaling a sum of RS.60,638/-. Thus the claim.
(3.) The opposite parties 1 to 3 (appellants), denying the allegations in the complaint, resisted the case, contending that they had taken all necessary precautions, to deliver the cover, where there was no indication of any valuable document, such as cheque, if indicated that may require more charges, that if the cheque had been corrected, the amount collected by somebody, the respective banks alone, are liable to reimburse the complainant, and that if at all, as per the conditions, available in the courier, receipt, they can be made responsible, only to the extent of Rs.100/-, thereby prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.;