PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. GOYAL TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal Is directed against order dated 16 -92002 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -II(for short hereinafter referred to as the District Forum) In Complaint Case No. 83 of 1999 M/s. Goyal Traders v. Punjab National Bank & 3 others", vide which the complaint has been allowed to the extent that the OPs have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/ - as compensation to the complainant and further to pay Rs.1, 000/ - as cost of litigation. The amount ordered to be paid as above would carry Interest @ 9% per annum n case the same is not paid within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of order.

(2.) THE undisputed facts of the case are that the respondent complainant M/s. Goyal Traders enjoined a cashed credit limit to the extent of Rs. 1 Lac as he was holding a cash credit bank account No. CC 71 with the appellant - Punjab National Bank. Manimajra. U.T.. Chandigarh. Shri T.C. Aggarwal is the Manager of the Punjab National Bank(for short hereinafter referred to as the Bank) while Shri Harjit Singh is the Accountant and Shri S.C. Mongia is the official posted in the said Bank. The complainant furnished security of immovable property consisting of his House No. 151. Samadhi Gate. Manimajra aforesaid. The complainant was having stocks for more than Rs. 4 Lacs at their showroom. The stock in the shop of the complainant was being surveyed by the Bank through its, officials referred to above to satisfy themselves with regard to the commercial activities. The survey had been conducted on 7/8 -10 -1998. The complainant was assured that it has sufficient funds available in the account.

(3.) THE complainant issued cheques No. 343587 dated 10 -10 -1998 for a sum of Rs.3,048/ - in favour of M/s. Global marketing. The said cheques was, however, not encashed by the Bank as according to it, the cheques "exceeds arrangement". The respondent/complainant immediately took up the matter with the bank and tried to ascertain the reasons for dishonouring the said cheques particularly when there was sufficient amount available at the credit of the complainant who had been fulfilling the conditions imposed by the appellants. The appellants Bank issued a certificate(Copy Annexure A -3) wherein it was intimated that the stock statement had not been submitted and as such the cheques had been returned. According to the averments made in the complaint, the stock in the shop of the complainant had been duly verified by the officials of the Bank only one or two days before the said cheques was dishonoured.