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

J.D.KAPOOR, RUMNITA MITTAL
Sunil Dua – Appellant
Versus
Dena Bank – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant: None.
For the Respondent:Mr. S.K. Atreya, Advocate.

ORDER (ORAL)

J. D. Kapoor, President—Complaint of the appellant seeking compensation from the respondent-Bank for having dishonoured two cheques issued by him irrespective of the fact that there was a sufficient balance in the S/B Account of the appellant was dismissed vide impugned order dated 19.11.2004 passed by the District Forum. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal.

2. The allegations of the appellant, in brief, were that in spite of sufficient balance in his account, respondent-Bank dishonoured two cheques numbering 135041 and 135042 dated 30.8.2001 for a sum of Rs. 3,150 and Rs. 3,005 respectively issued for payment of school fees of his children due to insufficient funds whereas there were sufficient funds in the account and so much so, thereafter respondent had also dishonoured certain cheques, the details of which were given in the complaint. According to the appellant he got his pass book updated as it showed a credit balance of Rs. 9,973.52 p. as on 28th September, 2001. Consequently, he asked for a sum of Rs.1,096 as the loss caused by the respondent-Bank and Rs. 20,000 as damages for the loss of reputation and defamation, etc. caused by the illega











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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top