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

2024 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 5311

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ANANDI RAMALINGAM, J
Priya Chowdhary – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank – Respondent


O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 15.03.2023 seeking information on the following points:

(i) Fate/date and time of the return of the cheque no. 046380 dated 03/03/2018 for Rs.11,36,868/- and cheque no.046379 dated 03/03/2018 for Rs.94,73,900/- both drawn in favour of me (Priya Chowdhary) on Vijaya Bank, SSI Branch, Noida and deposited with Maharani Bagh Branch, Ashram Chowk Branch of Canara Bank on 29/05/2018 for clearing.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.04.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-

The information sought by you does not fall under Section 2(f) of RTI Act, 2005.

Hence we are unable to provide information.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.05.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 31.05.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 16.07.2023.

5. The appellant remained absent during the hearing despite notice and on behalf of the respondent Advocate Arjun Malik attended the hearing in person.

6. The res

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