H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHIMLA.

First Appeal No.: 154/2022 Date of Presentation: 24.11.2022 Reserved on: 08.09.2025 Date of Decision: 16.09.2025 ……………………………………………………………………… Suresh Kumar S/o Sh.Hari Dass, R/o Village Bhaderkali, Mohalla Bandu, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P.

…....... Appellant/Complainant.

Versus

1. The Branch Manager, KCC Bank, Daulatpur, through its Manager Vijay Kumar, Tehsil Ghanari, District Una, H.P.

2. The G.M., The KCC Bank, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.

3. Standard Chartered Bank, Delhi through its Manager.

(Newly impleaded respondent vide order dated

17.10.2024).

.......... Respondents/Opposite Parties.

………………………………………………………………………

Coram Hon’ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President.

Hon’ble Ms.Yogita Dutta, Member.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

For the Appellant: Mr.Peeyush Agnihotri, Advocate vice Ms.Shrutika Chauhan, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1 & 2:Mr. Hitesh Khajuria, Advocate vice Mr.Pevinder Kumar, Advocate.

1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?

For Respondent No.3: None.

……………………………………………………………………………

Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President O R D E R:

Present appeal is preferred against the order dated 17.09.2022 passed by learned District Commission Una, in consumer complaint No.43/18 titled Suresh Kumar Versus The Branch Manager, KCC Bank & Anr., whereby, complaint filed by the complainant was dismissed.

Brief facts of the Case:

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is having account bearing No.50060034877 with the opposite party No.1/Bank. On 18.06.2016, the complainant deposited cheque No.105757 amounting to Rs.25,835/- with the opposite party No.1/Bank to encash the same. The opposite party No.1/Bank told the complainant that cheque has been encashed and money is credited in the account of the complainant. The opposite party/Bank asked the complainant to fill the form. On 24.05.2017, the complainant was in need of money and he asked the opposite party No.1/Bank about the encashment of the cheque in question, then the opposite party No.1/Bank despite giving satisfactory information to the complainant, started misbehaving with him and did not disclose about the cheque in question. The opposite parties knowingly and intentionally has not deposited the cheque amount of Rs.25,835/- in the account of the complainant, which is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

Hence, this complaint.

3. The opposite parties/Bank filed reply to the complaint and stated that on 18.06.2016, the complainant deposited demand draft No.105757 of Rs.25,835/- of Standard Charted Bank, Delhi and the opposite party No.1/Bank sent the said demand draft for clearance to Standard Charted Bank, Delhi through Madhur Courier Service, branch office near Maya Hotel, Una. Entry in this regard was made in dispatch register of the bank which is Annexure OP-3. The said Demand Draft has not returned back after clearance from Standard Charted Bank, Delhi. Thereafter, the opposite parties inquired the matter minutely from the courier agency, but the cheque could not trace out. The opposite parties/Bank also sent a legal notice to courier agency dated 18.06.2017, but no reply was received from courier agency. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. A prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.

4. Complainant filed rejoinder to the reply and denied the objections raised by the Bank and reiterated the contents made by the complainant in his complaint.

5. Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

6. After hearing the parties, learned District Commission dismissed the complaint of the complainant.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the order of learned District Commission, the appellant/complainant has preferred the instant appeal before this Commission.

8. During the pendency of appeal, appellant/complainant had filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for impleadment