M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) This appeal aims to upset the order of the District Forum, in CC.No.211/2008, wherein a direction has been issued against opposite party/appellant, to pay a total sum of Rs.7000/-, quantifying the compensation, as well as cost, based upon deficiency in service.
(2.) The respondent/ complainant, had availed the service of the opposite party bank, being the account holder, for more than 38 years, and the bank had extended cash credit account facility also, wherein the complainant was maintaining sufficient balance, paying amount also. The complainant, in order to discharge their liability, to one M/s. Arch Marketing Co., as well as Jainsons Steel and Co., issued two cheques dt.11.9.2007, for Rs.33770/-and Rs.27,422/-, respectively. But, unfortunately, the Bank returned the cheque, as if there was no sufficient fund, which should be construed as the lethargic attitude and negligence of the opposite party, which caused dent, in the business transaction of the complainant, giving mental agony, thought the bank had sent the amount to the payees, by banker?s cheque, on the next day, however for the negligence as well as deficiency, the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5 lakhs, as compensation. Hence the complaint.
(3.) The opposite party/ appellant, admitting more or less the averments in the complaint, pleaded that they have inadvertently returned the cheques, and on coming to know, within 24 hours, they rectified the mistake, which cannot be called as deficiency in service, and the claim of the complainant, that his reputation was spoiled also cannot be accepted, praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;