BEFORE THE PRESIDENT, DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, MAYURBHANJ, BARIPADA
C.D. Case No. 02 of 2008
In the matter of
Pradeep Kumar Das, Aged about 38 yrs
S/o- Sri Prassanna Kumar Das,
Walliganj, Ward No-2,
PO- Bhanjpur, Baripada
————————————Petitioner
-Vrs-
Chief Manager,
SBI, Main Branch,
Baripada
——————————–Opposite Party
Present:
Sri H. K. Panigrahi, President
Smt. Anupama Mohanta, Member
Sri K.C. Nayak, Member
Counsel:
For petitioner – Sri Baldev Barik & Associate
For Opposite Party – Sri Sitakanta Das & Associate
Date of argument: 21-11-09
Date of Order: 17-12-09
Judgment
Sri K.C.Nayak, Member
The case in brief is as follows:
1) The petitioner is an account holder in SBI Main Branch Baripada, bearing A/C No. 11043559525. He deposided a cheque for Rs. 10000/- drawn on The Baripada Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., Baripada, bearing No 594713 dt. 10-07-07 and drawn by one Debendranath palei, in his aforesaid account of SBI.
2) Finding that the said amount of Rs.10,000/- not being credited to his account even after a lapse of 5 months & failing to get any satisfactory reply in respect of the said cheque on very many occasions, the petitioner finally made a written complaint on 05-12-07 to ascertain the fate of the deposited cheque.
3) On receipt of the written Complaint, the OP obliged to intimate the complainant vide its letter dt.22.09.08 by a Regd letter No. 1676 dt. 24-01-08 stating therein the reason for non-credit (non-payment)of the said cheque i.e. due to “ insufficient fund” of the drawee.
4) In absence of any concrete information from OP about the cheque for a 5 month long period, the petitioner suffered mental agony facing financial stringency and claims Rs. 50,000/- towards mental agony & harassment for OP’s deficiency in service.
The Petitioner relies on the following documents to prove his case.
1) Counterfoil dt. 10-07-07 of SBI Deposit slip Annexure-1
2) Intemation letter dt. 23-07-07 of BUCCBL,
Baripada to SBI, Baripada Annexure-2
3) Copy of the cheque No. 59473 dt. 10-07-07
Drawn on BUCCBL, Baripada by DN Palei Annexure-3
4) Copy of the letter by the complainant to OP Annexure-4
5) Copy of the SBI letter dt. 22-01-08 along with
copy of the deposite slip dt. 10-07-07 Annexure-5
6) Original envelope address to the complainant
bearing regd. No. and date Annexure-6
The OP (SBI) in its written version says that information to the complainant about dishonor of cheque is not in practice and also says OP(Bank) would intimate the account holder by registered post and the postal charges would be “credited” to the account holder. Since there is no deficiency in his part, the case may be dismissed with cost.
Heard the case. Pursued the document relied upon. The only issue involve is bank is to intimate its account holder about the dishonor of cheque as a result the amount could not be credited to the account holder’s account. Whether non-reply to query or non-intimation to the account holder about the fate of the deposited cheque tantamount to deficiency in service.
The complainant deposited the cheque with SBI on 10-07-07 and the said cheque was bounced for “insufficient fund” which was intimated by the drawee Bank on dt.23-07-07 to OP(SBI) vide Annexure No.2.The fact of dishonor of cheque should have intimated to the said A/c holder immediately on or after 23-07-07 for his information & further course of action. This has not been carried out. This is a blatant violation of the guide line of Reserve Bank of India vide its circular No. DBOD.BC.Leg No.113/09.12.001/2002-03 dt. 26-06-03 which speaks as follows. “The dishonoured instruments are returned / dispatched to the customer promptly without delay, in any case within 24 hours. (Ref No- 3.36 – our circular DBOD No. BC.74/09.07.001/91-92 dt. 28th January 1992)”
Para 4 of the circular dt. 26-06-03 speaks the procedure for return/ dispatch of dishonour cheques. The collecting bank on receipt of such dishonour cheques should despatch it immediately to the payees / holders.
The contention in the para 4 of the written version of OP is therefore contrary to the guide lines of RBI.
OP (SBI) only acted upon after receipt of written complaint from the account holder. Therefore, the OP (SBI) as a service provider is grossly negligent in his duty, hence liable for deficiency in service.
OP is therefore, directed to pay Rs 3,000/- to the petitioner towards mental agony and harassment & Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation cost.
Hence ordered.
Order
The case be and the same is allowed partly on contest. OP (SBI) is directed to pay Rs. 3,000/-(three thousand only) towards mental agony and harassment and Rs. 2,000/-(two thousand only) towards litigation cost to the petitioner within 30 days on receipt of this order failing which 9% interest from the date of this order till payment would be levied.
The order is being pronounced in open forum this day of 17th Dec. 2009 with seal and signature.
sd/- sd/- sd/-
Smt. A. Mohanta Sri. H.K. Panigrahi Sri K.C. Nayak
Member President Member
D.C.D.R.Forum, Mbj, Bpd D.C.D.R.Forum, Mbj, Bpd D.C.D.R.Forum, Mbj, Bpd