Appeal No.1518/06

Ravindra Singh V. The Assistant General Manager,SBBJ,

C-Schme,Jaipur. & anr.

Before:

Mr.Justice Sunil Kumar Garg-President

Mrs.Vimla Sethiya-Member


Shri Dinesh Kumar Garg,counsel for the appellant

Shri Abhishek Jain,counsel for the respondents




Date of Judgement: 13.7.09



BY THE STATE COMMISSION


This appeal has been filed by the complainant appellant against the order dated 20.7.06 passed by the District Forum,Dholpur in complaint no.111/05,by which the complaint of the complainant appellant was allowed against the respondents SBBJ Bank in the manner that for the loss of the cheque of Rs.10,000/- in transit, the respondents bank were directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- as amount of compensation for mental agony and Rs.500/- as amount of cost only.


It arises in the following circumstances:


That the complainant appellant had filed a complaint against the respondents Bank before the District Forum,Dholpur on 10.8.05 interalia stating that the complainant appellant had submitted a cheque no.899890 of Rs.10,000/- which was issued by the State Bank of Baroda, Branch Anoopgarh,District Bikaner,before res.no.2 for encashment and clearance. It was further stated in the complaint that thereafter when the

2


complainant appellant enquired on the point whether the amount of the cheque had been credited in the account of the complainant appellant or not,he was told by res.no.2 that the cheque in question which was sent for clearance to Anoopgarh,Bikaner had been lost in transit and for the deficiency the complaint was filed.


A reply was filed by the respondents bank before the District Forum,Dholpur admitting the fact that the cheque in question was sent from Dholpur to Anoopgarh,Bikaner on 22.9.04 but the cheque had not been received by Dholpur branch and since it was lost in transit,therefore,no liability could be fastened on the respondents bank.


The District Forum after hearing both the parties had found deficiency in service on the part of the respondents bank and had awarded only a sum of Rs.1000/- as amount of compensation for mental agony and Rs.500/- as amount of cost.


Aggrieved from that order,this appeal has been filed by the complainant appellant.


In this appeal, following two contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the complainant appellant:


1.

that the amount of the cheque,ie. Rs.10000/- must have been ordered to be paid by the respondents bank to the complainant appellant,in case of loss of cheque in transit.
2.

that if the amount of the cheque in question lost in transit,could not be ordered to be paid,then,the compensation awarded by the District Forum could not be said to be justified and thus some more amount be ordered to be paid to the complainant appellant.

3


On the other hand,the learned counsel for the respondents bank has supported the impugned order.


We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.


In our considered opinion,looking to the fact that the cheque in question was for a sum of Rs.10,000/- and looking to the position of law that in case of loss of cheque in transit,the consumer is not entitled to the full amount of the cheque, but he is entitled to get some compensation and looking to the fact that for a cheque of Rs.10,000/-,which was lost in transit the amount of compensation of Rs.1000/- could not be said to be just and proper and that should be increased to Rs.5000/- in place of Rs.1000/-. To that extent this appeal deserves to be allowed.


For reasons as stated above,this appeal filed by the complainant appellant is partly allowed in the manner that the respondents bank would pay a sum of Rs.5000/- in place of Rs.1000/- as amount of compensation to the complainant appellant. To the above extent the impugned order dated 20.7.06 passed by the District Forum,Dholpur is modified. Rest order is maintained.




Member President