BHAG SINGH DANG Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21-12-1968 passed by the district Judge, Dehradun in Civil Appeal No. 3 of 1965.

(2.) The matter relates to State Bank of India Dehradun Branch. The State Bank of India has taken the place of Imperial Bank of India. Appellant Bhag Singh Dang was Head Cashier of the State Bank of India at Dehradun, Respondent. The Respondent filed suit for recovery of Rs. 5,778.55 P. The Additional Civil Judge 11 Dehradun who tried the suit decreed the suit for the full amount. In appeal by the present Appellant, the District Judge reduced the amount of the decree to Rs. 3,227.48 because the Respondent had deducted a total sum of Rs. 2,251.05 outstanding to its another employee Ram Asre, who was responsible for the forgery involved in the case.

(3.) Facts for the disposal of this appeal may be set out at some length. On 22-4-1950 Smt. Lilawati, widow of one Shyam Lal deposited Rs. 10,000.00 with the Respondent and obtained fixed deposit receipt. She gave her specimen signatures. The said signatures were verified by the Appellant. The amount was deposited for a period of 12 months. Smt. Lilawati did not obtain payment of her money after 12 months of the deposit. Consequently, the amount was carried in 'deposit at call account, of the bank. On 1-6-1953 the bank received a letter dated 30-5-1953 from Smt. Lilawati saying that the fixed deposit receipt had been lost and that a duplicate receipt be issued to her. On this letter the Appellant verified the signature of Smt. Lilawati. The Bank called upon Smt. Lilawati to remit Rs. 2.00 being the cost of stamp for the indemnity bond. The said sum was received by the bank on 6-6-1953 with a covering letter dated 4-6-1953 from Smt. Lilawati. The signature of Smt. Lilawati on this letter was also verified by the Appellant. On 6-6-53 the bank sent stamped indemnity bond to Smt. Lilawati. She returned it duly signed with a covering letter dated 11-6-1953. The Appellant verified the signatures of Lilawati on the letter as well as the indemnity bond. Consequently a duplicate fixed deposit receipt dated 18-6-1953 was issued in favour of Smt. Lilawati, With letter dated 24-6-1953 Smt. Lilawati sent the duplicate fixed deposit receipt to the bank duly discharged by her. The Appellant verified her signatures on the letter as well as the fixed deposit receipt. Thereupon the receipt was renewed and a fresh fixed deposit receipt was issued to her for a sum of Rs. 10,150.00 on 27-6-53. On 1-7-1954 the renewed receipt was presented at the bank for payment. The Appellant verified the signature of Smt. Lilawati on the back of the receipt. Consequently, a sum of Rs. 10,302.25 P. was paid by the bank to Smt. Lilawati. On 15-3-1955, the real depositor Smt. Lilawati called at the bank and presented the original fixed deposit receipt dated 22-4-1950 requesting that the proceeds be invested in 12 years national savings certificates. She was told that full payment of the receipt had already been made. She was shown all the papers. She disowned the signatures on the various documents adding that she was not even in India during the period 1st July 1953 to 5th Aug. 1954. The bank then concluded that the signature of real Lilawati had been forged and on that basis duplicate fixed deposit receipt was obtained, that then renewed fixed deposit receipt was obtained and lastly its payment was obtained. However, the bank obtained opinion of its hand writing expert Sri S. C. Chaudhary of Calcutta, who confirmed that the disputed signatures were not of real Lilawati. In these circumstances the bank paid Rs. 10,150.00 to real Lilawati on 20-6 -1955. In this way the bank alleged that it suffered a loss of Rs. 10,302.25 P. The bank further alleged that under the terms of the agreement dated 29-12- 1949 the Appellant was absolutely liable to make good the loss caused to the bank. Deducting certain amounts due to the Appellant, the bank sued for recovery of Rs. 5,778.53 P.