IN THE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI BEFORE : PRESIDENT Hon’ble Thiru Justice R. SUBBIAH F.A.NO.595/2022 (Against order in CC.NO.385/2005 on the file of the DCDRC, Chennai (South)

DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF JUNE 2025

1. The Manager M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd., (Loan Division)

No.1, Cenatoph Road Chennai – 600 019 2. The Manager M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd., No.110, Nungambakkam High Road M/s. K. Moorthy Nungambakkam Counsel for Chennai – 600 034 Appellants / 1&2 Opposite parties Vs.

1. Mrs. Revathi W/o. Santhanam M/26/1, 25^th Cross Street Besant Nagar Served called absent Chennai – 609 090 1^st Respondent/ Complainant

2. M/s. Systems Specialists Rep. by its Proprietor No.38/1, Viswanathapuram Main Road Kodambakkam Served called absent Chennai – 600 024 2^nd Respondent / 3^rd Opposite party The 1^st Respondent as complainant filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain direction. The District Commission had allowed the complaint in part as against the opposite parties. Against the said order, this appeal is preferred by the 1^st & 2^nd opposite parties praying set aside the order of the District Commission dt.2.2.2017 in CC.No.385/2005.

This appeal is coming before me for hearing finally on 21.8.2024, upon hearing the arguments of the counsel appearing for appellant and on perusing the documents, lower court records, and the order passed by the District Commission, this commission made the following order:

ORDER

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH, PRESIDENT

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/ 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties as against the order dt.2.2.2017 in CC.No.385/2005 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (South), in allowing the complaint in part.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred as per the ranking before the District Commission.

3. The case of the complainant in brief is as follows:

The complainant approached the 3^rd opposite party to purchase a personal computer on instalment basis. The 3^rd opposite party had also assured the complainant that they would arrange for loan to purchase the computer through the 1^st opposite party. Accordingly, the 3^rd opposite party collected an initial amount of Rs.9102/- on 22.7.2003, and collected 18 post dated cheques, each for Rs.2222/-, drawn on ICICI Bank Ltd., Nungambakkam branch, where the complainant is having savings bank account. Subsequently, the complainant approached the opposite parties 1 & 2, for obtaining loan. The complainant had also produced the invoice issued by the 3^rd opposite party, with regard to the cost of the computer. Subsequently, the loan was sanctioned, and the amount was disbursed to the 3^rd opposite party towards the cost of the computer. But the 3^rd opposite party had not delivered the computer deliberately. Therefore, without any other option, the complainant instructed the 2^nd opposite party to stop payment of cheques issued for the month of September 2003 to December 2003. But, when the complainant went to the ATM of ICICI Bank to withdraw money, to her shock she noticed that two cheques bearing No.091037 dt.7.9.2003 and cheque No.091038 dt.7.10.2003 has been cleared by the 2^nd opposite party, inspite of the complainant’s stop payment instructions. The cheque No.091037 dt.7.9.2003 became invalidated on 7.3.2004, but the 2^nd opposite party colluded with the 1^st opposite party, has cleared the invalidated cheque wantonly and deliberately on 8.3.2004. Hence she sent a letter dt.23.3.2004 to the 1^st opposite party demanding to reverse the entry of Rs.4444/- in her credit account, and also wrote a letter dt.30.3.2004 to the opposite parties 2 & 3. But till date there was no response. Hence the complainant sent a legal notice dt.30.4.2004. Though the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties have received the notice, they have not complied with the demands made by the complainant. The notice sent to the 3^rd opposite party was returned. The 3rd opposite party failed to supply