VIDYA MONGIA vs PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, AMBALA CITY

- THE partly successful complainant appeals against the order of the District Forum, Ambala City granting a marginal compensation of Rs. 500/- only for dishonouring her cheque. THE solitary question raised on behalf of the appellant is with regard to the quantum and enhancement of compensation granted.

THE facts merit notice with absolute brevity relevant to the aforesaid question only. THE appellant who had her account in the Ambala Branch of the Punjab National Bank secured an urgent transfer payment order for Rs. 5,000/- to be credited in the Delhi Branch of the said bank. THE aforesaid bank''s TPO was issued on 15th of May, 1992 but owing to the negligence of the respondent-bank the same was not credited in their Delhi Branch till one month and six days thereafter on the 21st of June, 1992. Meanwhile the appellant issued a cheque for Rs. 4800/- in favour of Vijay Bank for the payment of the requisite money to get the rights issues of ICICI. THE said cheque was dishonoured and the appellant''s grievance was that she consequently missed the opportunity of securing the said debentures, resulting in the loss of Rs. 20,000/-. Defending the complaint, the respondent-bank admitted the broad factual position of the issue of the TPO for Rs. 5,000/- but speciously pleaded that the admitted delay in crediting the same was due to the default of the courier to whom, it was delivered for transmission. The District Forum on a consideration of the material came to the firm finding that the respondent was guilty of the deficiency of banking service. However, whilst granting relief it reduced the claim of a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and instead granted a compensation of a mere Rs. 500/-only.

The learned Counsel for the complainant has forcefully highlighted that compensation granted is wholly meager, considering the mental harassment caused to the appellant, occasioned by the grave indignity of having her cheque dishonored, and further in missing a valuable chance of a rights issues of the ICICI debentures.

MR. Ashok Sharma, the learned Counsel for the respondent on the other hand somewhat curiously argued that there was no liability at all on the part of the respondent and there was no deficiency of service. It is somewhat plain that the plea taken on behalf of the respondent-bank is wholly untenable in this appeal preferred by the appellant. It was conceded before us that the respondent-bank had not chosen to challenge the firm finding of a deficiency of services against it by the District Forum by way of a cross appeal. Therefore, the order of the District Forum as regards the merits of the case has achieved finally against them. Having not preferred as cross appeal, the respondent''s are patently barred to take up in the comprehensive plea of total absence of liability.

THE only question is in regard to the amount of compensation granted. Mr. Bhag Singh, the learned Counsel for the appellant had urged that the true measure thereof is the sum of Rs. 2,000/- which the appellant had claimed. We are, however, of the view that the said tall claim is not acceptable, though some enhancement in the compensation granted is patently warranted. It deserves highlighting that the whole purpose of the transfer payment order is the quick transmission of the amount. Herein there is a gross delay of more than one month and six days which is utterly unjustifiable. This has resulted first in the wrongful dishonour of the appellant''s cheque and undoubtedly the loss of at least a chance of getting debentures in a rights issue. Inevitably in such situation no precise quantum is possible and as a rule of thumb we are inclined to enhance the compensation to at least to Rs. 1,000 / -. THE appellant is also entitled to her costs which are assessed a sum of Rs. 500/- only. This appeal is allowed in the terms aforesaid and the afore-mentioned amounts must be tendered within one month from today failing which compliance will be enforced by the District Forum under Section 27 of the Act as already recorded by it. Appeal allowed.