SUDHA JAIN Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 1.6.2005 of State Commission, Delhi directing return of the complaint to the appellant/complainant for being filed before the concerned District Forum.

(2.) In the complaint, in addition to Preet Vihar branch of respondent No. 1/opposite party No. 1 Bank, R.K. Jain/respondent No. 2, husband of the appellant was arrayed as opposite party No. 2. Complaint was filed, inter alia, alleging that for the education and other expenses of appellants son in New Jersey Institute of Technology, USA, the appellant had arranged an amount of Rs. 4.50 lakh from Vijaya Bank, Vigyan Lok, Rs. 1.50 lakh from Vijaya Bank from appellants own account, Rs. 3.00 lakh from respondent No. 2s OD A/c No. 558 in Punjab National Bank, Anand Vihar and further amount of Rs. 4.10 lakh from respondent No. 2s Saving A/c No. 27111 at Punjab National Bank, Preet Vihar. Under a wrong impression, cheque Nos. 527554 for Rs. 2,10,000 and 527553 for Rs. 8,50,000 were issued on 25.6.2003 by the appellant in the name of respondent No. 2. These cheques were deposited in the collection box at Preet Vihar branch of respondent No. 1 bank at 9.00 a.m. Immediately after dropping these cheques, the appellant contacted her Counsel/chartered accountant who advised not to transfer the amount in that manner. Thereafter, appellant approached the Manager-incharge along with a letter from respondent No. 2 with request to retain the amount of said two cheques in her account and the Manager accordingly wrote instructions on the letter itself. In the passbook, in appellants account, balance as on 25.6.2003 was shown as Rs. 13,21,243.93. It was further alleged that on 27.6.2003, the appellant approached respondent No. 1 Bank along with cheque No. 527555 for preparing a pay order of Rs. 13 lakh in the name of her business firm. Respondent No. 1 advised that single pay order above Rs. 10 lakh cannot be prepared. Appellant asked respondent No. 1 to make two pay orders of Rs. 9,00,900 and Rs. 4,00,400 from her account and for that purpose issued cheque Nos. 527556 and 527557. Respondent No. 1-bank despite assurance did not prepare the two pay orders. Both these cheques were received by respondent No. 2 by registered post on 7.7.2003 with a memo dated 5.7.2003 with reason No. 7 i.e., Insufficient Funds. On 14.7.2003 the appellant presented her passbook for updating and after updating thereof, she was surprised to see that sums of Rs. 8,50,000 and Rs. 4,10,000 of aforementioned two cheques had been transferred by respondent No. 1-bank on 27.6.2003 in the account of respondent No. 2. It was claimed that respondent No. 1 did not have the authority to transfer the said amounts in the account of respondent No. 2. In para No. 16 of complaint the reliefs claimed pertained to : <FRM>JUDGEMENT_149_CPJ2_2007_1.html</FRM> Award was sought to be passed against respondent No. 1-Bank for the amount of Rs. 68,51,321.

(3.) Order under appeal notices com-pensation sought is highly exaggerated, imaginary, irrational and has been inflated in order to invoke the jurisdiction of the Commission. Order further notices that the petitioner and respondent No. 2 are living together and have no strained relations.