Goa State Co-operative Bank
This is a discussion on Goa State Co-operative Bank within the Banking forums, part of the Financial Services category; Gautam N. Pednekar , R/o H. No.107A/2, St. Jerome Vadho, Xelpem, Dhuler , Mapusa, Goa . .. .Complainant V Goa State ...
- 09-04-2009, 11:37 AM #1Administrator
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Goa State Co-operative Bank
Gautam N. Pednekar,
R/o H. No.107A/2,
St. Jerome Vadho, Xelpem,
Dhuler, Mapusa, Goa. .. .Complainant
Goa State Co-operative Bank,
Souza Santuary, Tali Vadho,
Mapusa Goa. ...... ... ..Opposite Party
Date: - 26/03/2009
O R D E R
(Per Smt. Shanti Maria Fonseca, Sr. Member)
Brief facts of the Case:-
1.The Complainant is having a Savings Bank Account No.575 with the Opposite Party at Tali Vadho, Bardez Goa. It is his case that on 20.11.06 when he got his Pass Book updated he found a difference in his Pass Book balance amounting to Rs.1009/- (Rupees one thousand and nine only). According to the Complainant he requested the Opposite Party to show cheque bearing No.655137 dated 08-08-06 amounting to Rs.1009/- for which his account had been debited.
2.The Complainant has admitted in para 9 of his Complaint that he had himself drawn this cheque a long time ago but had not presented it to the bank. It is his case that he did not cancel nor destroy the said cheque having full trust and confidence in the Opposite Party that they would not encash the same by any stranger without the valid signature/ verification of the Complainant. It is therefore his case that the Opposite Party has been negligent in their duties by encashing the said cheque to a stranger and therefore liable for deficiency in service.
3.The case of the Opposite Party is that the cheque in dispute is a bearer cheque and the person holding the said cheque has got a good title. It is also their case that the said cheque was duly filled and signed by the drawer of the instrument. It is also their case that the cheque was deposited within the period of its validity i.e. within 6 months and therefore it could not be considered as a stale cheque by any stretch of imagination. It is also their case that the Complainant should have informed the same to the Bank to stop payment or even the fact that it had been misplaced/ lost.
We have gone through all evidence that has been placed before us by both parties and are of the opinion that there is absolutely no negligence on the part of the Opposite Parties. The carelessness if any is on the part of the Complainant who has taken things for granted. As such we pass the following:
1.Matter stands disposed as dismissed.
2.No order as to costs.
3.Parties to collect the copy of their order from the office.
** PMs asking me for support will be deleted unless I've asked you to PM me with additional details **
- By Sidhant in forum JudgmentsReplies: 1Last Post: 02-11-2010, 10:57 AM
- By admin in forum BankingReplies: 0Last Post: 09-06-2009, 06:01 PM
- By admin in forum JudgmentsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-05-2009, 12:53 PM
- By Advocate.sonia in forum JudgmentsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-02-2009, 04:41 PM
- By Sidhant in forum JudgmentsReplies: 0Last Post: 09-01-2009, 07:07 PM