INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. DURGESH KHULLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the Indian Overseas Bank, challenging order dated February 27, 1996 passed by the District Forum, Ropar allowing the complaint filed by Durgesh Khuller and directing the opposite party-appellant to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as compensation along with a sum of Rs.1,000/- as costs of litigation.

(2.) The appellant Indian Overseas Bank is having its Extension Counter at Mohali, where the complainant Durgesh Khuller was maintaining his Saving Bank Account. The complainant submitted a cheque for Rs.13,122/- for realisation and credit of the amount in his account with the Bank. The Bank delayed clearance of the cheque by about 9 days and in the meantime, cheque issued by the complainant for a sum of Rs.22,836/- along with application for allotment of a plot submitted with the Canara Bank, Chandigarh, was dishonoured by the appellant Bank on October 14, 1992. In this manner, the complainant's application for allotment of the plot was summarily rejected. He suffered loss and claimed a sum of Rs.2.5 lacs with interest against the appellant-Bank on account of deficiency in rendering service in the matter of getting clearance of his cheque and crediting its amount of Rs.13,122/- in his Saving Bank Account. The claim was contested by the appellantbank, taking different pleas. The claim was stated to be time-barred and it was denied that there was any deficiency in the matter of rendering service. Both the parties produced affidavits in support of their allegations. The complainant along with his affidavit also produced certain documents relating to the subsequent cheque, which was dishonoured. Canara Bank was also impleaded as a party and in its reply stated that the cheque presented by the complainant was dishonoured by Indian Overseas Bank on account of insufficient funds.

(3.) This case also has some history. Initially, the complaint was filed before the State Commission, UT, Chandigarh. It was returned and filed in the State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. It was ordered to be returned to be filed in the District Forum, Ropar and ultimately it was done. In appeal, the only question stressed by learned Counsel for the appellant-Bank is that there was no deficiency in rendering service. The cheque was presented for clearance. The amount of the cheque on realisation was deposited in the Saving Bank Account of the complainant on October 15,1992. Whereas, the cheque issued by the complainant was dishonoured on October 14, 1992 as admittedly on that day, sufficient amount did not stand to the credit of the complainant that the cheque could be cleared.