S.C. Vyas, President— This order will govern disposal of appeal No. 449/08, 477/08 and revision No. 05/08, which have been arisen out of the same impugned order dated 5.7.08 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bilaspur (hereinafter called “District Forum” for short), whereby the complaint of the complainant Akhtari Begam was allowed and the OPs i.e. Bilaspur Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. (hereinafter called “Co-operative Bank” for short) as well as State Bank of India, Main Branch, Raipur have been directed to provide duplicate cheque after making joint effort from the concerning Government Department, to the complainant within 2 months and to credit the amount in the account of the complainant and if the amount is not credited on the basis of such duplicate cheque then ¾ of the amount will be paid by the State Bank of India, whereas ¼ of the amount will be paid by Co-operative Bank. Apart from it, it was also directed that @ 6% p.a. interest would be paid by both Bank on their respective share of amount of Rs. 36,000. Cost of litigation Rs.1,000 was also awarded.

2. The grievance of appellant of appeal No. 477/08, who was complainant before District Forum is that the District Forum has awarded interest only @ 6% p.a. whereas the interest should have been @ 12% p.a. Some other grounds were also taken in the appeal memo by the complainant, but the appellant’s counsel during arguments only pressed the question of award of interest and its rate.

3. Appeal No. 449/08 has been filed by the Co-operative Bank on the ground that under the provisions of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 Section 45 (a), the Bank was having no liability of payment of any amount. It has also been contended that the Cooperative Bank was only collecting agency and that duty was performed by the Bank and the cheque was sent to the State Bank of India for payment of cheque amount, therefore, no liability of payment of any interest or compensation can be fastened on the Cooperative Bank.

4. The State Bank of India has challenged the impugned order by filing a revision petition on the ground that no portion of the deposited amount is payable by the Bank as the amount of cheque was never deposited in the Bank. It has also been contended that the cheque was never received by the Bank, so it was illegal to impose any liability upon the Bank.

5. The short facts of the case, as unfolded from the record of the District Forum are that the complainant Akhtari Begum, has received a payment of Rs. 36,000 through cheque, from the Income Tax Department in connection with some services provided by giving a vehicle on hire to that department. That cheque of Rs. 36,000 was deposited by the complainant in her Bank for crediting the amount in her Bank Account. Later on she learnt that the amount had not been credited in her Bank Account. While the Co-operative Bank was saying that the cheque was sent to the State Bank of India for clearance and has not been received after clearance, the State Bank of India was giving evasive replies and was not clearing the cheque. In these circumstances, she was forced to file the complaint before District Forum.

6. In reply, the Cooperative Bank stated that when the cheque was presented in the Bank, then the same was sent by registered post to the State Bank of India for clearance but was not cleared and therefore, the amount could not be credited in the Bank Account of the complainant. It has been specifically stated that there was no mistake on the part of the Cooperative Bank in not crediting the amount.

7. The OPs 2 & 3 i.e. State Bank of India in their written version has stated that no such cheque was ever received by the Bank for clearance. It has also been specifically stated that if the duplicate cheque was provided for clearance then the Bank was ready to cooperate in crediting the payment of the cheque amount even on the basis of duplicate cheque. It has been contended .that no cheque was received by the Bank, so