A.K.ANNAMALAI J. - (1.) The 1st opposite party is the appellant.
(2.) The complainant filed a complaint against the opposite party before the District Forum claiming for the relief of directing the 1st opposite party to pay the cheque amount of Rs.54,728.80 with 12% interest and to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental agony and for cost.
(3.) The details of the complaint in brief are as follows :- The complainants husband is the NRI Account holder in account No.4150 with the 1st opposite party and in which the complainant also having savings bank account No.4100 having transactions with the bank. Complainants husband working in Saudi Arabia and eh used to send foreign cheques to his wife and she used to collect through the 1st opposite partys bank regularly. Since the complaint husband came to India on leave for 4 months he drawn cheque for 4500 Saudi Riyals around for Rs.54,728/- of Indian money value drawn on his own name to be paid through his account No.4150 cheque dated 16.10.04. On 26.10.04 the complainant being the beneficiary presented the cheque in her husband account for payment before reaching of her husbands to India and after her husband arrived when they contacted the bank the amount was not given credit after collection and the 1st opposite party evaded reply. But asked for duplicate cheque and the complainant husband obtained the same by incurring a sum of Rs.3,000/- as expenses for the same from Saudi. The 1st opposite party has misplaced or lost the cheque as believed by the complainant. Since the husband of the complainant returned to Saudi Arabia in the month of March 2005 and the amount of Rs.54,728.80 had not been recovered from the 1st opposite party he and the complainant have been put to lot of mental agony and there was deficiency of service on the part of the 1st opposite party. Hence a legal notice was sent jointly on 27.1.05 for which the 1st opposite party bank replied by stating that the cheque was sent for collection through 2nd opposite party and the same has been missed in transit. There is no privity of contract between the complainant and the 2nd opposite party. Hence the 1st opposite party alone is liable for the amount. The 2nd opposite party impleaded as necessary party for the proper adjudication. Hence the complainant filed this complaint for the relief as above.;