HOWRAH DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED vs PANCHANAN DAWAN

HEARD learned Lawyers of both sides. The appeal is directed against order dated 3.10.1997 passed by the CDF, Howrah, directing the opposite party to pay interest @ 12% p.a. on the sum of Rs. 73,450/- for a period of five months only. The opposite party was further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation on the ground of mental anxiety, harassment, etc. to the complainant.

FACTS involved in this case are very short. The opposite party/Bank received a cheque for the sum of Rs. 73,450/- from the local office of Provident Fund Commissioner at Howrah representing the pensionary benefits of the claimant. According to the complainant the said cheque was received on time but it was not credited to his account in spite of repeated requests. The cheque was ultimately cleared and due credit for the amount was given in the account of the complainant. The Forum observed that the conduct of the Bank betrayed negligence and deficiency in service to the complainant is not crediting the amount of the cheque within a reasonable period. Learned Lawyer for the respondent has drawn out attention to paragraph 18 of the written objection filed by the Bank before the Forum. On a reference to it, it is evident that cheque for the sum of Rs. 73,450/- was received by the then Manager of the Bank. But unfortunately the said cheque was misplaced and as a result thereof it could not be sent for clearance in due time. It has been further averred that due to overburden of work the said Manager could not send the said cheque for clearance in due time. This is a clear admission on the part of the Bank. That there had been negligent dealing in the matter of clearance of the cheque in question is palpable. The learned Lawyer for the appellant submits that the cheque number for which the dispute has been raised does not tally with that which they had received. He submits that they have received one cheque for an identical amount on 13.8.1992 and credited the amount in the account of the complainant on 22.8.1992. On examination of the averment made in the written objection before the Forum it would be apparent that an attempt is being made to improve the case in appeal. The case of the opposite party before the Forum was quite clear. We have very carefully analysed the circumstances during hearing and come to a definite conclusion about the deficiency in service on the part of the Bank. That there had been delay in the matter of encashing the cheque is quite apparent from the materials on the record, we find no reason to hold otherwise. Accordingly we think that the Forum was justified in directing the payment of interest @ 12% p.a. for five months only. With regard to the award of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for harassment and mental agony, etc. we find that this amount of compensation is on the higher side. We think that the interest of justice would be met if a sum of Rs. 1,000/- only is awarded as compensation for deficiency in service on the part of the Bank. The payment so ordered be made within a period of one month from this date. With this modification we dispose of the appeal. Appeal disposed of.