UNITED BANK OF INDIA Vs. NARESH LAKSHMANLAL BATHIJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendant is the appellant in this second appeal.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 18,600/= with interest and cost against the defendant contending that (i) the honouring of cheque No. 3260 on 19. 10. 1982 for the sum of Rs. 11,900/= was invalid and (ii) the transfer of a sum of Rs. 6,800/= on 20. 6. 1983 by the defendant Bank was without any authority. According to the plaintiff he was a minor at the time of instituting the suit was having a saving account with the defendant bank at Salem Branch in SB A/c. No. 646 in the year 1980. The plaintiff subsequently closed his account on 4. 1. 1984. ON receipt of the statement of accounts, the plaintiff come to know that a sum of Rs. 11,900/= has been debited as per cheque No. 3260 on 19. 10. 1982 and the sum of RS. 6,700/= was debited to his account by way of transfer on 20. 6. 1983 by the Bank without any authority. The plaintiff issued a legal notice on 1. 2. 1984 demanding Rs. 6,700/= which has been transferred without any authority and also called upon the defendant bank for a photo copy of the disputed cheque. On a perusal of the photo copy of the cheque furnished by the plaintiff found that the cheque was not issued by him. It s the case of the plaintiff that the alleged cheque dated 19. 10. 1982 has been issued by one Mr. Suresh Lal, in his handwriting, a partner of M/s. Moolchand Lakshmanlal, who conspired with the partner of the said firm and forged his signature in the cheque. Hence the suit.

(3.) THE defendant filed a written statement stating that the father of the plaintiff Mr. Lakshman Lal was doing banking business in various names with his family members as propertied and partnership concerns. In the business concern M/s. Moolchand Rameshlal, the next friend of minor plaintiff, and Lakshmanlal's younger brother were partners. The minor plaintiff's account was opened on 3. 6. 1980 and he has been operating the account in his own name by issuing cheques and the same were going on smoothly till October 1982. The family members of Lakshmanlal incurred loss during October-November 1982 and they have left the residence in Salem. Several cases were filed against the family members of the plaintiff. The father of the plaintiff, Lakshmanlal was adjudged as insolvent by this court on his own petition in O. P. N. 34/83.