ORDER

Under section 12(3) of consumer protection Act. 1986.

SRI.H.Y.VASANTHKUMAR, PRESIDENT 

             The Complainant has sought direction against the Opposite party no.1/ICICI bank, Bengaluru and the Opposite party no.2/ICICI bank, Badodra, to give him the compensation of Rs.1 lakh, immediately without elaborating further, by making allegation of deficiency in their service in misplacing of his cheque dtd.07.07.17 for Rs.58,000/-.

          2. The case of the Complainant in brief is that he had deposited Canara Bank cheque dtd.07.07.17 on 11.07.17 at ICICI bank of of Hebbal Kempapura branch for Rs.58,000/- and the said branch informed him that the said cheque was lost and not traceable and requested him to get another cheque from the party. With great difficulty he could get one cheque only for Rs.29,000/- from his client who refused to issue another cheque as he was not having funds. The bank sent the apology letter dtd.21.08.17 and as such he sustained monetary loss and suffered with mental shock and hence he deserves to get relief immediately.

          3. The Complainant has filed the copies of two Challans, letter dtd.27.07.17 written to Opposite party no.1 and apology letter dtd.21.08.17 of Hebbal Kempapura branch.

          4. The ICICI bank, Hebbal Kempapura branch which has misplaced the cheque and sought apology through doc.no.3 is not impleaded. How the Opposite parties no.1 & 2 (of different areas) are connected with this incident is not explained. In the said challans shown in doc.no.1, his name is not mentioned. The name of Smt.Priya with account ended with five last digits 24613 is shown. In the second Chelan also, the same bank account is shown. The Complainant who produced pass book in another connected case has not produced the pass book in this case. Non production of the passbook, hence make it impossible to believe that he is the consumer/customer of Hebbal Kempapur branch of ICICI bank. In the result he has failed to establish that he is a consumer u/s 2d of CP Act and that he has got case against the Opposite parties no.1 & 2. He has failed to implead the bank where the cheque was deposited and failed to explain who is Smt.Priya and how he is empowered to file this complaint based on the said challan of Smt.Priya. In the result the Complainant deserves to get the following:

                       ORDER

The CC.No.2389/2017 filed by the Complainant is rejected u/s 12(3) of CP Act. No order as to costs.         

          (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by her/him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Forum on 16^th September 2017).