Back
APPEAL No. 1803/2022
Date of Filing : 02.09.2022
Date of Disposal :29.09.2022
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:29.09.2022
PRESENT
Mr K B. SANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER
APPEAL NO.1803/2022
Mr. Ramesh R
S/o Mr Ramakrishna
Aged about 42 years
Residing at No.9/1
Burndavana 5th Cross
Nethravathi Road
Maruthinagar
Chandra Layout
Nagarabhavi
Bengaluru-560 072
(By Mr. Sharath Kumar Shetty, Advocate)
Appellant
-Versus-
1. The Authorised Officer
HDFC Bank Ltd.,
Municipal No.8/24
Richmond Road
Corporation Division No.61
Bengaluru -560 025
Branch Code 523
2. The Branch Manager
HDFC Bank
No.52, 1st Main
Near Nagarabhavi BDA Complex
Annaporneshwarinagar
Nagarbhavi,
Bengaluru-560072
3. The Branch Manager
HDFC Bank
No.9, ‘Eterna’ Koramangala
Industrial Layout
APPEAL No. 1803/2022
Koramangala
Bengaluru-560 095 Respondents
-:ORDER:-
Mr K B. SANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. This is an Appeal filed under Section 15 of Consumer
Protection Act 1986 by OPs aggrieved by the Order dated 05.07.2022
passed in Consumer Complaint No.293/2021 on the file of I
Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Bengaluru (for short, the District Forum).
2.
Commission examined the grounds of Appeal, impugned order
and heard learned counsel found satisfied to dispense with issuance
of appeal notice to respondent as not necessary.
3. Learned counsel for Appellant submits that an endorsement
issued on 29.12.2020 and because of such delay in issuing
endorsement and in not honouring the cheque amount by OP had
lost a legal remedy, yet the Commission below wrongly come to the
conclusion, that complainant to avail civil remedy by filing a suit for
recovery. According to complainant cheque was presented on
20.12.2020, while OP issued an endorsement only on 29.12.2020,
which is clearly establish the alleged deficiency of service on the
part of OP was not at all considered by the Commission below.
4. We examined the impugned order, found Commission below
observed, complainant can get a fresh cheque from Mr. Srinivas N.V
or else he can get the stale cheque re-validated and even if that is not
possible can file a Civil suit to recover cheque amount of Rs.28
lakhs.
5. The brief facts alleged by the complainant in the complaint
that one Mr Srinivas N.V. issued a cheque dated 25.09.2020, drawn
on HDFC Bank, Nagarabhavi Branch, Bengaluru in favour of
APPEAL No. 1803/2022
Complainant, he deposited the said cheque for encashment at the
Richmond Road Branch on 22.12.2020. According to Complainant,
issuing bank, where the cheque was presented are one and the same
viz., HDFC Bank and they are impleaded as OPs 1 and 2, he alleged
that cheque presented by him was returned without encashment
with an endorsement that the ‘cheque is stale’. He alleged that it
was due to negligence of the OP, resulted in the loss of amount
mentioned in the Cheque. However, facts remain that the
complainant has failed to show as on the date of presentation of
cheque on 22.12.2020 Mr. Srinivas N.V. had sufficient funds in his
account to en-cash the covered amount of the cheque and when this
vital aspect was not at all shown either to the Commission below or
this Commission, delay in issuing endorsement alone cannot be said
rendering deficiency in service on the part of OP. We have gone
through the records and complainant found failed to convince to
show in between the date of presentation of the cheque and
issuance of the endorsement Mr.Srinivas N.V. had sufficient funds to
honour the cheque in question and in such circumstances,
Commission below has to be held rightly dismissed the complaint
