BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
at Berhampore, Murshidabad.
Case No: CC/ 157/2008. Date of Filing (Original):22.09.2008.
Date of Order: 24-12-2009
Name of the Complainant(s) Name of the Opposite party/parties
Rajendra Kumar Baid, Branch Manager,
Partner of Raj Medical Hall, State Bank of India,
P.O. Aurangabad, Aurangabad Branch, P.O. Aurangabad,
Dist. Murshidabad. Dist. Murshidabad.
PRESENT
1. Shri G. M. Midhya – President
2. Smt. P. Ali – Member
3. Shri T. K. Biswas – Member
JUDGMENT
This case has been filed by the complainant u/S 12 of C.P. Act, 1986(as amended up to date). The case of the complainant, in short, is that he runs business of medicine under the name and style ‘Raj Medical Hall’ at Aurangabad. Nicholas Piramal India Limited is a pharmaceutical with which the complainant has business transactions. The complainant is having a bank account being No. 111755917447 with the OP. He issued cheque No.614372 dt. 21.1.2008 for Rs.86, 599.00 in favour of the Nicholas Piramal India Limited on the OP bank. But the said cheque was bounced and returned by the OP with a comment “’Exceeds Arrangement’ though on the said date the balance in the account of the complainant was Rs.1,83,140/-. Following such bounce of cheque, Nicholas Piramal India Limited was not happy and sent a message to the complainant as ‘when you are placing order in Vistaar Division, the same must accompany a draft proportionate to the order value’. The complainant approached the OP time and again for answer about such behaviours but his approaches were paid no heed to. The complainant has lost his goodwill and prestige in the field of business; and he has been defamed due to deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence, this case.
He prays for Rs.2, 50,000.00 for loss of prestige and Rs.2, 50,000.00 for mental agony, pressure upon mind and harassment.
The OP, Branch Manager, SBI, Aurangabad Branch, Murshidabad filed written version and contested the case. According to it, Nicholas Piramal India Limited deposited the said cheque at H.D.F.C. Bank, Kolkata which subsequently sent the same to SBI, Berhampore Branch for clearance. Berhampore Branch returned the s aid cheuqe with a report ‘exceed arrangement’ instead of ‘drawer’s signature differs’ erroneously. The complainant was informed more than once of such fact but he remained silent. The OP i.e. SBI, Aurangabad Branch has not issued the alleged return report. So, it has not got any fault. Through correspondences with SBI, Berhampore Branch, it has come out that due to bonafide mistake on the part of the concerned officer of SBI, Berhampore Brach the cheque in question had been returned back with remarks as ‘exceeds arrangement’. The remark should have been mentioned as ‘signature differs’. The present OP is not liable for it and, as such, the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs as prayed for. The OP bank has also raised the defect of non-joinder of parties and question of jurisdiction. According to it, the case must fail.
We have heard Ld. Lawyers at length. Several documents have been filed by the complainant whereas no document, whatsoever, has been submitted by the OP. Perused the documents on record and examined the contents minutely.
The complainant has filed copy of the cheque in question, copy of the concerned bank account maintained from the period from3.1.2008 to 30.1.2008, copies of letters addressed to the Branch Manager, SBI, Aurangabad Brach, and the copy of letter sent by Nicholas Piramal India Limited to the complainant. Ld. Lawyer for the OP raised no question about the genuineness of those documents of the complainant at the time of hearing of the case.
There is no doubt about the fact that the complainant was having A/C No.11175917447 with the OP and he issued a cheque for Rs.86, 599.00 on 21.1.2008 in favour of the Nicholas Piramal India Limited on the said branch. Also there is no doubt that the cheque was bounced on the grounds as if it exceeds arrangement. From the entry dt. 21.1.2008 of bank account in the concerned bank account it is evident that that Rs.1, 83,140.64 was outstanding balance at the credit of the complainant. Naturally, it is not at all true that there was excess of arrangement as alleged as the ground for dishonouring the cheque. There is no evidence on record at the credit of the OP that the signature of the account-holder had differed and on that ground the cheque was dishonoured; rather it has been admitted by the OP that due to mistake of a bank official of Berhampore Branch the act of bounce of the concerned cheque was done. Whatever may be said as defence by the OP, nothing is sufficient to be accepted as valid ground behind bounce of the cheque in question. It is a clear example of deficiency of service on the part of the OP and it has undoubtedly resulted in loss of prestige, fame and goodwill of the business of the complainant. Also such act of the OP has warranted to the complainant mental pressure. So, the OP bank is liable to feel the consequences by which the complainant should get adequate relief.
In our reasoned view we may express definitely that prestige, fame etc. are incorporeal and abstract qualities. No money, material or metal can take place of such virtues in the event of loss. Still the person who causes such loss should not be spared unpunished. In that analogy it is our assessment the OP must pay a token amount of Rs.50, 000.00 to the complainant as relief as prayed for.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That Consumer Complaint No.157/2008 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP. The OP is directed to pay to the complainant Rs.50, 000.00 as above within one month from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to realize his dues as per law and procedure.
The OP shall also pay Rs.5,000.00 in addition to the above amount as cost of the proceedings Such payment shall also be made within the time as stipulated.
The case is thus disposed of.
Dictated and corrected by us.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT