State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Jeyakumar,Tanjore Diast. vs The Branch Manager, Sbi Thanjavur Dist. on 8 July, 2015
IN THE TAMIL NADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MADURAI BENCH.
Present: Thiru.J. JAYARAM, Presiding Judicial Member.
Thiru.M. MURUGESAN, Member.
F.A.No.192/2012
(F.A.No.699/2011 on the file of State Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Chennai)
(Against the order in C.C.No.80/2007, dated 31.05.2010 on the file of DCDRF,
Thanjavur.)
THE 08th DAY OF JULY 2015.
N. Jayakumar,
S/o V. Narayanaswamy,
92, Kalanivasal Village,
Peravurani Taluk,
Thanjavur District. Appellant/Complainant
Vs
1. The Chief Manager,
Indian Bank,
Pattukkottai Branch,
Thanjavur District. 1st Respondent/1st Opposite Party
2. The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Peravurani. 2nd Respondent/2nd Opposite Party
Counsel for Appellant/Complainant : M/s. N. Jeyakumar, Advocate.
Counsel for Respondent-1/Opposite Party-1 : Mr.S. Devaraj, Advocate.
Counsel for Respondent-2/Opposite Party-2 : Mr.N. Sundararajan, Advocate.
2
This appeal coming before us for final hearing on 09.06.2015 and on
hearing the arguments of both sides and upon perusing the material records this
Commission made the following:
ORDER
Thiru. J. JAYARAM, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER.
1. This appeal is filed by the complainant seeking enhancement of compensation award of the District Forum, Thanjavur in C.C.No.80/2007 dated 31.05.2010, allowing the complaint.
2. The case of the complainant is that he presented a cheque for Rs.1,25,000/- in the 1st opposite party bank on 11.04.2006 for collection and the cheque was not honoured, but the 1st opposite party did not send the returned cheque to the complainant and so he issued legal notice to the opposite parties. The 2nd opposite party sent a reply intimating that the cheque was not honoured and the returned cheque was sent to the complainant through courier service. The cheque amount could not be realized by the complainant and no action could be taken against the party who issued the cheque. All these amount to negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
3. According to the opposite parties the cheque was not honoured and the returned cheque was sent to the complainant through courier service and there is no deficiency in service on their part.
3
4. The District Forum considered the rival contentions and allowed the complaint passing an order directing the 1st opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards monetary loss and to pay costs of Rs.1000/-.
5. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation the complainant has preferred this appeal praying for enhancement of compensation.
6. It is pertinent to note that the cheque amount is Rs.1,25,000/- and the cheque was returned dishonoured, but as held by the District Forum the returned cheque has not been sent to the complainant. Had the complainant received the returned cheque he could have proceeded against the party who issued the cheque and without receiving the returned cheque from the opposite party, the complainant could not initiate legal action against the party concerned and he could not realize the money. In these circumstances we have to consider that the complainant suffered loss of the cheque amount of Rs.1,25,000/- and the complainant has to be duly compensated in the interests of justice.
7. In this case a meagre amount of Rs.15,000/- has been awarded by the District Forum which is not at all reasonable and adequate compensation.
8. The appellant/complainant has claimed Rs.1,25,000/- towards the cheque amount and a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation and costs of Rs.2000/-.
9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we feel that award of Rs.1,25,000/- would be the reasonable compensation and a sum of 4 Rs.10,000/- would be the compensation for mental agony and Rs.2000/- as costs.
10. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed modifying the order of the District Forum and directing the opposite parties to pay compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees one lakh twenty five thousand only) towards monetary loss and a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation for mental agony and to pay costs of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand only). No order as to costs in the appeal.
Sd/-xxxxxxxxx Sd/-xxxxxxx M. MURUGESAN, J. JAYARAM, Member. PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER. INDEX: YES / NO AMS/Mdu Bench/Orders- 2015/July.