SAHARA HOUSING FINA CORPORATION LTD Vs. SRIJAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.234/2005 on the file of District Forum-II, Krishna at Vijayawada, opposite party preferred this appeal.

(2.) The brief facts as set out are that the complainant was induced by the opposite party to purchase a house by availing loan and the complainant availed the loan and purchased the house and was paying the EMI regularly. It is the case of the complainant that she gave a cheque bearing No.241160 dated 5-3-2004 for Rs.20,000/- towards instalment due and thereafter she paid an amount of Rs.5,000/- on 8-3-2004 vide receipt No.32446, Rs.8000/- on 20-3-2004 vide receipt No.32703 and Rs.10,000/- on31/3/2004 vide receipt No.32725 and paid more than Rs.20,000/- but the opposite party did not return the cheque and intentionally presented the same for collection without the knowledge of the complainant and got issued a legal notice dated 20-8-2004 to the husband of the complainant with false and untenable allegations for which a reply was sent and thereafter also the opposite party did not return the cheque. The complainant submitted that she discharged the entire debt by paying Rs.85,413/- and even thereafter the opposite party intentionally kept the cheque and all her efforts for getting back the cheque became futile. Hence the complaint for a direction to the opposite party to return the cheque bearing No. 241160 dated 5-3-2004 for Rs.20,000/- together with compensation and costs.

(3.) Opposite party filed version contending that the allegations of the complainant are false and submitted that the name of the opposite party was changed as M/s.Sahara Housing FINA Corporation Limited. It contended that it was not the complainant that gave the cheque but it was her husband who gave the cheque to the Branch Manager of the opposite party for Rs.20,000/-. It admitted that the complainant paid Rs.23,000/- but it was paid for dues and though the complainant persuaded the husband of the complainant, co-borrower, he failed to adhere the request of the opposite party and hence they presented the cheque for collection and it was dis-honoured on the ground of insufficient funds. Thereafter a notice was issued to the husband of the complainant for which a reply with false and untenable allegations was given and therefore the opposite party filed a private complaint U/s.138 of N.I. Act and the same was numbered as CC 1490/2004 on the file of III Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Vijayawada. Since the husband of the complainant failed to attend the court, a Non Bailable warrant was issued which is pending. Later the opposite party inadvertently typed that the complainant and her husband were due Rs.85,413/- plus penal charges and later sent a letter dated 11-9-2004 stating that the above figure was a mistake and the complainant and her hushand were due Rs.85,413/- principal amount apart from interest etc., Taking advantage of the same, the complainant sent a D.D. for Rs.85,413/- and is now insisting for return of the cheque which is before the court of law and submitted that the complainant is due in an amount of Rs.1,58,230/- and filed the complaint as a counterblast to CC No.1490/2004 and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.