S.G. Deshmukh, J. —The present appeal is filed by original complainant against the judgment and order dated 30.9.2000 in complaint case No. 140/2000 passed by District Consumer Forum, Jalgaon.

2. Appellant/complainant’s case before the Forum is that, he had requested to the respondent bank for issuing two bearer demand drafts each of Rs. 9,980 in favour of Ramesh Kumar and Suresh Kumar respectively payable at Ludhiana. Accordingly, he deposited Rs.20,000 towards the drafts and its commission in the bank on 4.9.97. It is contended that, the bank handed over two bearer demand drafts in favour of Ramesh Kumar and Suresh Kumar drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad, Ludhiana. It is contented that, both the drafts were lost by the complainant. Complainant informed the respondent bank in writing for stopping the payment of drafts and issuing duplicate drafts on 9.9.97. It is contended that, he was asked to come after some days by the respondent bank but he was not given duplicate drafts. It is contended that, on 11.11.98 he was given letter of State Bank of Hyderabad stating that, the draft in favour of Suresh Kumar has been encashed and no information about the draft in favour of Ramesh Kumar has been received. It is contended that, the draft in question was not encahsed by Suresh Kumar in whose favour the draft was drawn. It is contended that, the payment of the draft in favour of Suresh Kumar was made somebody else on 20.9.97. Complainant gave notice dated 13.2.2000 but respondent did not reply the notice neither paid the draft amount. Thus, complainant approached the Forum.

3. Respondent appeared before the Forum and resisted the claim. Respondent is not at dispute that, one draft has been encahsed. It is contended that, complainant was informed for giving indemnity bond for withdrawing the amount of other draft. Respondent is also not at dispute that the draft has been encahsed from State Bank of Hyderabad, Ludhiana on 20.9.97. Accordingly, respondent has received the information from State Bank of Hyderabad, Jalgaon Branch. It is contended that, the drafts were bearer drafts complainant did not take proper care and thus there is no deficiency on their part. It is also contended that, on receipt of information of complaint on 9.9.97 about loss of drafts respondent had intimated the State Bank of Hyderabad branch Jalgaon accordingly.

4. The Forum below after going through the papers and hearing the parties partly allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay amount of Rs. 9,980 of the draft which was not encahsed with interest @ 18% p.a. from the date of judgment.

5. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by District Forum, complainant came in appeal.

6. Notices were issued to the appellant as well as respondent. Appellant appeared in person and filed written argument. Learned counsel Shri Gholap A.M. appeared on behalf of respondent. He submitted that, both the drafts issued on State Bank of Hyderabad, Ludhiana were bearer drafts. Complainant did not take proper care and those were lost because of negligence of complainant. Learned counsel also submitted that, after receiving information about loss of the draft from the complainant respondent had intimated the State Bank of Hyderabad, Jalgaon branch about the loss of draft and for stopping the payment. Learned counsel submitted that, the drafts asked by the appellant were to be drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad and those were bearers. Learned counsel also submitted that, the appellant did not implead State Bank of Hyderabad, Jalgaon branch as party to the complaint. He fully supported the judgment of the Forum. They had intimated about the loss of drafts to the State Bank, of Hyderabad, Jalgaon branch. So there is no deficiency in their service.

7. We perused the written argument filed by appellant and also gave our anxious thoughts to the argument advanced by learned counsel for the respondent. There is no dispute that, amount of Rs. 20,000 was