2025:CGHC:26009 Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: NAFR

2025.06.23

17:19:42 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA No. 143 of 2020 Reserved on 13-6-2025 Delivered on 20 - 6 - 2025

1 - Bank Of India Through Power Of Attorney Shri Rajendra Kumar Dhruv, Chief Manager, At Present Shri I.C. Gupta, S/o R.P. Gupta Chief Manager , Tatyapara Branch, Bank Of India , Raipur , District Raipur , Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus

1 - Neeta Vishwakarma D/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Vishwakarma Aged About 38 Years Address Badhaipara, Near Kuwa, Lalta Chowk , Raipur , District Raipur , Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For appellants : Mr. Rohitaswa Singh, Adv.

For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Satish Surya, Adv. on behalf of Mr.

Yogesh Pandey, Adv.

(Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J)

CAV Judgment

1. The appellant/plaintiff has preferred this first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (henceforth, referred to as ‘CPC’) against the judgment and decree dated 30-1-2020 passed by the 5^th Addl. District Judge, Raipur (CG) /trial Court in Civil Suit No. 83-B/2014, whereby the trial Court has dismissed the recovery suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff.

(hereinafter, parties shall be referred as per their description before the trial Court).

2. Brief facts of the case are that, the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 4,14,120/- pleading therein that the plaintiff is a banking institution, which has a branch located at Tatyapara, Raipur (CG). The defendant has a savings account number 935410110001534 in the plaintiff bank Tatyapara branch, Raipur which is operated by the defendant herself. One Pankaj Agarwal gave the defendant a cheque dated 27.03.2014 of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Cheque No. 575998). The defendant deposited the said cheque in her account in Bank of India Tatyapara branch for the purpose of payment. The said cheque bounced on 04.04.2014 due to insufficient funds during CTS clearing, but due to system error, the said amount got credited to the defendant's account, which is the bank's amount. On coming to know through return memo dated 14.06.2014, that the said cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, the plaintiff bank during investigation found that the defendant had withdrawn the said amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- from her account. The plaintiff bank immediately contacted the defendant over phone to inform her about this incident and on 11.07.2014, the plaintiff bank sent its employee to the defendant to return the said cheque and return memo to the defendant. When the defendant refused to accept the said cheque and return memo, the plaintiff bank sent a notice to the defendant through its advocate on 15.07.2014 demanding Rs. 4,01,464/- and thereafter, filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 4,14,120/-

against the defendant.

3. The defendant filed written statement, denying the averments made in the plaint and pleaded that Pankaj Agarwal had given cheque no. 575998 of Rs. 4,00,000/- to the defendant, which she presented to the Tatyapara branch of plaintiff’s bank for payment on 27.03.2014. The defendant's savings account is in Tatyapara branch, wherein, the cheque in question was cleared and the amount of the cheque was credited to the defendant's account and the defendant withdrew and used the above amount as per her requirement. At the time of withdrawal of the above amount, no objection or information of any kind was raised by the plaintiff. The plaintiff informed the defendant about the dishonour of the cheque after about four months and sent a letter dated 11.07.2014 so that the defendant could not take any legal action against Pankaj Agarwal. The defendant further stated in her reply that the plaintiff came to know about the dishonor of the cheque in question on 14.04.2014, but the information was not given to the defendant immediately, which shows that the above circumstances have arisen due to the negligence of the plainti