SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

UNION TERRITORY CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava,
President; Dr. P.K. Vasudeva &
Mrs. Devinderjit Dhatt, Members
INDER MOHAN RISHI—Appellant
versus
ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL BANK OF
COMMERCE & ANR.—Respondents
Appeal No. 141 of 2001—Decided on 6.8.2001

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Pankaj Chandgothia, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mrs. Neena Madan, Advocate.

The bank is liable for the lost cheque and must credit the amount in the complainant's account.

Headnote:

Cheque - Banking Dispute - [Negligence, Liability, Service] - [Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881] - The court discussed the liability of the bank in case of a lost cheque, the duty of the bank to credit the amount of the cheque, and the legal remedy available to the complainant. The court highlighted the deficiency in service on the part of the bank and directed the bank to credit the amount of the cheque in the complainant's account.

Fact of the Case:

The complainant deposited a cheque with the bank, which was lost in transit. The bank denied receipt of the cheque and correspondence. The District Forum-I held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the bank and awarded compensation to the complainant. The complainant appealed against the direction to seek legal remedy for the recovery of the cheque amount.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the bank was negligent in handling the cheque and directed the bank to credit the amount of the cheque in the complainant's account. The court affirmed the compensation awarded by the District Forum-I.

Issues: The issues involved the liability of the bank for the lost cheque, the complainant's entitlement to the cheque amount, and the legal remedy available to the complainant.

Ratio Decidendi: The bank, as the custodian of the cheque, was held liable for the lost cheque and was directed to credit the amount in the complainant's account. The complainant was not entitled to interest on the cheque amount as the bank did not keep the amount with them.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the bank was directed to credit the amount of the cheque in the complainant's account. The compensation awarded by the District Forum-I was affirmed.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.K. Srivastava, President—This is an appeal filed against the order dated 20.9.2000 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh [for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum-I] in Complaint Case No. 279 of 1995, Inder Mohan Rishi v. Assistant General Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce & Anr.

2. The complainant held a Saving Bank Account No. 5036 with opposite party No. 2 - Branch Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sector 19, Chandigarh. He deposited a cheque bearing No. 605809 dated 18.8.1994 with the opposite party No. 2 on 22.8.1994. The said cheque was for the sum of Rs. 10,000/- drawn on State Bank of India, Patna (State of Bihar). The amount of the said cheque was not credited in the Saving Bank Account of the complainant. The complainant wrote letters to the opposite parties - Bank regarding the fate of the cheque as aforesaid. It is alleged that ultimately Shri Gupta, Manager of the Bank told the complainant that the said cheque had been lost in transit. Therefore, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 11.3.1995 by registered A.D. Post and the same was served on the opposite parties. The opposite parties sent a reply to the legal notice in which they denied the receipt of the cheque by them. They also denied the receipt of any letter and correspondence with regard to the cheque. The respondent-Bank, it is alleged, received a letter dated 21.11.1994 from the Bank at Patna which clearly shows that the cheque was deposited with the Bank which appears to have been lost. The complainant claimed a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, the amount of the cheque together with interest @ 24% per annum from the date of deposit of the cheque i.e. 22.8.1994 till the date the amount is actually deposited and credited in the Saving Bank Account aforesaid. He also claimed damages for mental agony and torture besides a sum of Rs. 2,000/- as litigation expenses.

3. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed their reply before the District Forum-I contending that the cheque in question was not sent to the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Exhibition Road, Patna by registered post bearing receipt No. B/5363/116599762 dated 24.8.1994 from the Post Office situated in Sector 19-D, Chandigarh. It was contended that the registered letter did not reach the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Patna Branch. The Postal Authorities, it was alleged, were necessary party to the complaint and the complaint was liable to be dismissed for the non-joinder of necessary party. It was, however, admitted in reply on merits that the complainant had Saving Bank Account No. 5036 with the respondent - Bank. The fact regarding the deposit of cheque No. 605809 dated 18.8.1994 drawn on State Bank of India, Rajinder Nagar, Patna from C.A. No. 1236 issued by Shivam X-Ray, Patna for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was deposited with respondent No. 2 - Bank and the same was sent along with Bill clearing No. 928 dated 23.8.1994 by registered post to Oriental Bank of Commerce, Patna on 24.8.1994. The said letter, however, did not reach the Patna Branch and is reported to have been lost in transit. It was contended that the respondents are not deficient or negligent in rendering service. The cheque in question was misplaced negligently by the Post Office and the deficiency in service is on the part of the Post Office. It was further contended that the complainant is at liberty to obtain duplicate cheque from its drawee.

4. After the evidence was led by the parties before the District Forum-I, the District Forum-I held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party-Bank. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- was awarded to the complainant as compensation. The complainant was, however, allowed to pursue legal remedy for the recovery of Rs. 10,000/- from the party who had issued the cheque as permitted by law.

5. Feeling aggrieved against the order passed by the District Forum-I, the complainant has filed this appeal. The Notice of appeal was issued to the








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top