Date of Filing:27-06-2016
Date of Order:11 -06-2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT.
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
Tuesday, the 11th day of June, 2019
C.C.No.321 /2016
Between
Rajaramrao Duggirala S/o.Late Sri D.S.Rao
Aged 78 years, Retired Army officer of Rank Lt Col
R/o.Plot No.156, H.No.37-113/2,
Sree Colony,
Neredmet X Roads, Secunderabad – 500056
Telephone –No-040-27112653, Mobilee-9849317763 ……Complainant
And
- Rajendra Sinhji Institute (Extension of Telangana And Andhra
Sub-Area officers mess)
C/o.HQ Telangana and Andhra Sub-area,
JJ Nagar Colony, Secunderabad – 500007,
Tele-No.040-27862584,
Mobile No.918008939501. Here in after ref to as RSI
- Br.Manager State Bank of India,
Defense Colony BR 8025,
Neredmet X Roads, Secunderabad - 500094,
Tele No.27113943, 27113005, 27100099
(Here in after referred to as SBI)
- Br.Manager State Bank of Hyderabad,
IFSC Code SBH0020080, 86,
Cariappa Road, Bolarum Br.Hyderabad
Pin – 500010, Telangana, Phone No.040-27862193
E-Mail ID, Herein after referred to as SBH …. Opposite Parties
Counsel for the complainant : Mr.A.Veeresh Kumar
Counsel for the opposite Party No.1 : M/s. Dishit Bhattacharjee
opposite Party No.2 : Ms. Sangeeta Jaiswal
Opposite party No.3 : Absent
O R D E R
(By Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)
This complaint has been preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act of 1986 alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
- The averments of the complaint in brief are that the complainant is an Ex-service man and he got a savings bank account bearing No.10082865534 with SBI Defence colony branch. He gave an account payee cheque dated 20-11-2015 for a sum of Rs.1500/- infavour of opposite party No.1 towards payment of bill for the month of November, 2015 and obtained a receipt for it. On 22-12-2015 he received a letter dated 17-12-2015 from opposite party No.1 stating that cheque issued by him has been returned for the reasons that “ Other reasons” and stating so he was asked to remit the bill amount into account No.62218253148 with IFSC code SBHY 0020080 belongs to opposite party No.1 account. Thereupon the complainant contacted the manager of his bank branch and had shown the letter received from him by opposite party No.1 and enquired as to why the cheque delivered by him for Rs.1500/- has been returned though sufficient funds are available in his account. He was informed by SBI branch that the said cheque was cleared on 25-11-2015 and an amount of Rs.1500/- was debited from his account. Then the complainant got updated the entries in his pass book and it indicated crediting of an amount of Rs.1500/- to the account opposite party No.1 against cheque bearing No.639784 as on 25-11-2015 but opposite party No.1 informed that his cheque has been returned for other reasons. Hence the complainant felt that there is something wrong somewhere and in order to avoid termination of his membership and disciplinary action for dishonnour of cheque for non-payment of bill amount in time, remitted an amount of Rs.1500 in cash towards clearance of the bill amount on 24-12-2015 and obtained a receipt.
The complainant addressed a letter to opposite party No.1 with a copy of his pass book entries to opposite party No.1 informing that the cheque delivered by him earlier for Rs.1500/- was honoured on 25-11-2015 and requested for clarification from its bank SBH Bolarum branch. For the said letter he did not receive any reply. He collected returned cheque bearing No.639784 dt. 20-11-2015 from the office of opposite party No.1 along with covering letter and then examined the same and noticed that the cheque was presented firstly into the account of opposite party No.1 with HDFC bank on 09-12-2015 and in turn the said cheque was deposited to SBI defense colony branch being a drawee bank and in turn SBI defense colony branch returned the cheque quoting “other reasons” and returned the cheque back to HDFC bank. But the said cheque was already honoured and paid the amount but on the cheque there is no official stamp of SBH Bolarum branch on any side of it.
On 05-1-2015 the complainant addressed a letter to the Chief Manager SBI Defence colony branch to investigate the circumstances under which the subject cheque has been returned, despite amount has been debited from his account. He sought a reply for the said letter within 30 days but did not receive any reply. Then he got issued a notice on 16-2-2016 to opposite party No.1 SBI Defence colony branch explaining the details of issue and enclosed the copy of dishonoured cheque, statement of account issued by SBI Defence colony branch and the copy of the covering letter by which HDFC bank returned the cheque to opposite party No.1. He sought reply for it within 15 days from the date of receiving the said letter but he did not receive any reply from either of the parties.
The complainant was forced to pay the amount twice towards clearance of bill amount to opposite party No.1 first time by of cheque dated 20-11-2015and second time by way of depositing of cash on 24-12-2015 though there was no fault on his part. The opposite party No.1 maintaining an account bearing No.62218253148 with SBH bolaram branch and another account with HDFC bank Begumpet branch. Opposite party No.1 at first instance deposited the cheque of the complainant with HDFC bank and again later with SBI Bolaram branch for the reasons best known to it and thereby caused loss to the complainant.
Since the complainant did not receive replies to the letters from the opposite parties he lodged a complaint with Banking Ombudsman for investigation of the complaint in detail and pin point the defaulters. But Banking Ombudsman in the reply stated that the matter requires a detailed investigation which is outside purview of it and the matter was treated as closed under clause ( c) of the Banking Ombudsman scheme 2006. In response to a query made by banking Ombudsman the Manager SBI Defense colony branch forwarded a letter and also copy of originally paid cheque which are received by it from SBI CCPC, Hyderabad. SBI Defence colony branch returned the cheuqe in question was paid on 25-11-2015 whereas the opposite party No.1 returned the said cheque to the complainant thus opposite party No.1 alone can answer as to how and why it got the original cheque after depositing the same with its bank SBH Bolaram branch and the said cheque was deposited earlier with the HDFC bank. But there was no response. Thus the complainant has been deprived of proper banking services and defective service rendered from opposite party No.1. Hence the present complaint for retrieving Rs.1500 lost by the complainant in the transaction together with penal interest from defaulting party and a compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for harassment and humiliation metted out to the complainant at the age of 78 years.
- Opposite party No.1&2 filed independent written version denying the material allegations in the complaint and liability to pay any compensation to the complainant.
The substance of the defense of opposite party No.1 in its written version is that that present complaint is not maintainable because it is an institute of an officers and is not providing any service for any consideration and there no unfair trade practice being adopted by it. Similarly opposite party No.1 is not a corporate body but an extension of Telangana and Andhra Sub Area officers Mess and not a juristic identity. No complaint is maintainable against it. Opposite party No.1 primarily provides facility to the serving officers of Army, Navy and Air force. As a matter of facility the recreation facilities provided in the mess are also extended to retired officers of Army, Navy and Air force. The facilities which are chargeable in the mess includes food, beverages etc consumed by the retired officers and their family members and will recover the cost of it at the end of the month. The membership extended to the retired officers s is not like the membership extended by any other recreation club to its members. The service provided is on gratis. Hence the consumer complaint against it is not maintainable. That apart the ownership of the mess vest with Union of India, Ministry of Defence and the Union of India which are not made a parties to the present complaint hence not maintainable.
The complainant is a member of opposite party No.1 and had deposited a cheque bearing No.639784 dated 20-11-2015 for a sum of Rs.1500/- with SBI Defence colony towards payment of bill for the month of September, 2015 for the consumption of beverages and good. The said cheque was deposited into the account of opposite party No.1 maintained with SBH Bolaram branch on 23-11-2015 for crediting the amount to its account but the cheque was returned. The original cheque was again presented to HDFC Alwal branch for crediting into the account of opposite party No. 1 bearing No.50100066788172 belong to opposite party No.1 on 9-12-2015. The said cheque was returned by HDFC Alwal branch without realization with an endorsement as for other reasons. Due to non realization of the cheque the complainant was requested to remit the amount of Rs.1500/- by NEFT through letter dated 17-12-2015 and accordingly the complainant deposited the amount in cash on 24-12-2015. Later the complainant visited the opposite party No.1 in the month of February 2016 and asked for the original cheque bearing No.639784 delivered for Rs.1500/- and accordingly the same was handed over to him under acknowledgment. The complainant addressed a letter dt.16-2-2016 informing that an amount of Rss.1500/- of the above cheque was debited from his SB account No.10082865534 maintained with SBI defence colony, Secunderabad on 25-11-2016. On verification of the bank transaction it was noticed that the amount had actually been debited from complainant’s account on 25-11-2015 and credited the same into account of opposite party No.1 maintained with SBH Bolaram branch where the cheque was initially deposited but the said cheque was returned without bank memo. Hence the amount of Rs.1500/- was refunded to the complainant by crediting into his RSI running accounts on 05-03-2016 and the same was reflected in the monthly bill of the complainant in the month of February, 2016. Hence there is no subsisting issue with the complainant as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
- Opposite party No.2 in its separate written version stated that the complainant has issued a cheque bearing No.639784 dated 20-11-2015 for a sum of Rs.1500/- in favour of opposite party No.1 which presented for clearance and accordingly an amount of Rs.1500/- was debited from the account of the complainant on 25-11-2015 and credited to the account of opposite party No.1 maintained with SBI Bolaram branch and the said fact was communicated with the complainant by the branch manager of opposite party No.2 and complainant also got confirmed the same when he got updated his bank pass book. Opposite party No.2 has not committed any deficiency of service and their arose any cause of action to file a complaint against it by the complainant. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.
In the enquiry the complainant got filed his evidence affidavit reiterating the material fact narrated in the complaint and he got exhibited fifteen (15) documents to support his version . On behalf of Opposite Party No.1 the evidence affidavit of Col. Retd. P.V.Durga Prasad is got filed and substance of his evidence affidavit is in line with the defense taken in the written version filed for it. For opposite party No.2 evidence affidavit of its Branch Manager is got filed and the contents therein are in line with the written version filed for its behalf of. Two (2) documents are got exhibited on behalf of opposite party No.1. Complainant and both the opposite parties have got filed the written arguments.
On a consideration of material available on the record the following points have emerged for consideration .
- Whether the complainant could prove that there was deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the amounts claimed in the complaint?
- To what relief?
Point No.1: The documents exhibited on record by both the parties are not in dispute. It is evident from the record that the complainant delivered the subject cheque exhibited as A1 bearing No.639784 for a sum of Rs.1500/- to opposite party No.1 towards clearance of bill amount. Ex.A2 is the letter addressed by opposite party No.1 to the complainant informing him that the cheque delivered by him was returned on the reasons that “ other reasons”. It is evident from the statement of account relating to the complainant’s account maintained with SBI Defence colony, Branch, the said cheque was honoured by his banker on 25-11-2015 i.e. on the 5th day of delivering the same by complainant to opposite party No.1 and amount of Rs.1500/- was debited from the complainant’s account and was credited to opposite party No.1 with its banker. But surprisingly the same cheque was again presented by opposite party No.1 with HDFC Bank on 9-12-2015 and it was returned by the complainant’s banker as the reasons “as other reasons” there upon opposite party No.1 delivered the cheque to the complainant through letter dt.17-12-2015. It is evident from the written version of opposite party No.1 as well as evidence affidavit filed on its behalf that cheque was originally presented to SBH Bolaram branch where opposite party No.1 maintained account and got cleared then how cheque can be returned after the clearance by the banker of opposite party No.1 is not known. In the normal circumstances the original cheque should have been with the bank which cleared by debiting the amount from the account holder. Accordingly the evidence affidavit of Col. Durga Prasad filed on behalf of opposite party No.1 the subject cheque Ex.A1 was deposited into the account of opposite party No.1 maintained with SBH Bolaram Branch on 23-11-2015 and even after the clearance of the cheque and debiting the amount from the account of the complainant it was returned, then again Ex.A1 it was presented to HDFC bank Alwal Branch for crediting the amount into account of the opposite party No.1 maintained with HDFC bank from where it was returned with an endorsement as “for other reasons”. If the evidence affidavit of Col.Durga Prasad is taken into consideration it is crystal clear that on the 3rd day of delivery of cheque by the complainant opposite party No.1 deposited the same with its banker SBH Bolaram Branch and got credited the cheque again into account on 25-11-2015 but got the said cheque again then deposited with the HDFC bank on 9-12-2015 second time and after return of the cheque from the HDFC bank addressed a letter to the complainant under Ex.A2 on 17-12-2015 asking the complainant to remit amount through NEFT and thereby made the complainant remit the amount again. The evidence affidavit of Col.Durga Prasad itself shows the cheque had actually was cleared on 25-11-2015 and the amount of Rs.1500/- debited from the account of the complainant and credited to the account of opposite party No.1 maintained with SBH Bolaram branch where cheque was initially deposited. Hence it is for the opposite party No.1 to explain as to how after passing of the cheque on 22-11-2015 the cheque came to its hand and why it was again deposited with the HDFC Bank Alwal Branch for crediting the amount second time. No attempt has been made by opposite party No.1 to explain as to how it got the cheque after it was cleared on 22-11-2015. As rightly pointed out by the complainant some invisible hand was there in this transaction making the complainant to pay the amount second time for no fault of him. It is a clear case of unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party No.1 for attempting of encash the same cheque twice in different banks.
In the written version as well as evidence affidavit filed for opposite party No.2 also there is no explanation as to why and how the cheque after clearance and debiting the amount from the account holder on 25-11-2015 was allowed to pass the same cheque into the hands of opposite party No.1 but opposite party No.2 has not made any attempt to explain this aspect. So on the part of the opposite party No.2 also there is unfair trade practice. Hence the point is answered infavour of the complainant.
Point No.2: As the complainant could substantiate the unfair trade practice and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties he is entitled for the reliefs. It is evident from the record that an amount of Rs.1500/- was credited into the account of the opposite party No.1 so the question of a further direction to opposite party No.1 to refund the amount to the complainant does not arise. However on account of unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties they are liable to pay compensation to the complainant as such opposite party No.1 &2 are liable to pay compensation and costs to the complainant.
Point No.3: In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite parties 1 &2
- To pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the complainant as compensation for harassing him for no fault of him
- They are further liable to pay Rs.2,500/- each towards cost of this complaint to the complainant
- Complaint against opposite party No.3 is dismissed.
Time for compliance: 30 days from the date of service of this order. If they failed to pay compensation amount awarded within one month from the date of service of the order they are liable to pay interest thereon at 12% P.A from the date of complaint to the date of payment.
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by her, pronounced by us on this the 11th day of June , 2019
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Exs. filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1- copy of dishonoured cheque
Ex.A2- copy of letter No.11701/CR/RSI dt.17-12-2015
Ex.A3- copy of pass book
Ex.A4- copy of cash receipt
Ex.A5- copy of letter addressed to Secretary RSI dt.24-12-2015
Ex.A6- copy of returned cheque and the covering letter
Ex.A7- copy of letter dt.05-01-2016
Ex.A8-copy of letter dt.16-02-2016
Ex.A9- copy of letter received from Banking Ombudsman dt.11th May 2016
Ex.A10- Suspension of RSI membership vide letter No.3489/PC/A/RSI dated 11-02-2017
Ex.A11- copy of reply notice sent by the complainant on 20-02-2017 vide DRR/CC/1/ASA/2017
Ex.A12- postal receipt dated 20-02-2017
Ex.A13- copy of monthly bill details of January 2016 issued by RSI
Ex.A14-copy of monthly bill details of February 2016 issued by RSI
Ex.A15- copy of receipt dt.03-03-2016 for Rs.3080/- by RSI vide voucher No.CR/002872/15-16
Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party
Ex.B1- Statement of account
MEMBER PRESIDENT
