Benjamin Vas v. ING Vysya Bank Ltd.,

Sri.D.Krishnappa, President 1. The Complainant has come up with this Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite party with his grievance that he had an account in the Opposite party Bank, that he had issued a cheque for Rs.34,000/- to one Smt.V.Shamala cheque bearing No.042416 dated 18.09.2006, thereafter he had informed the Manager of the Opposite party to stop payment of that cheque, then he was instructed by the Manager to give a letter of stop payment. Accordingly, he gave a letter on 20.09.2006 requesting the Opposite party to stop payment of that cheque and he later on telephonically also informed the Opposite party in that regard. But to his surprise he found that the cheque he had issued in favour of Smt.Shamala was honoured on 05.10.2006 and payment was made to her, despite his letter of stop payment dated 20.09.2006.

Therefore, the Complainant alleging deficiency in the service of the Opposite party has prayed for a direction to the Opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.34,000/- with interest at 12% p.a. from 05.10.2006 till the date of payment with other reliefs. 2.

The Complaint is resisted by the Opposite party with its version admitting the Complainant having an account in their bank and issue of stop payment instruction and also a letter as instructed by them on 18.09.2006, but have contended the Complainant never told them to stop payment of cheque bearing No.BB1042416 dated 16.09.2006 for Rs.34,000/-, but the Complainant had asked them to stop payment of cheque bearing No.042418 dated 16.09.2006 which was also for the amount of Rs.34,000/-. Accordingly, they have stopped the payment of cheque bearing No.042418 and as they had not received any stop payment instructions in any form did not stop the payment of cheque bearing No.1042416 and therefore, denying any deficiency at their end have contended if the Complainant has aggrieved he has remedy against Shamala and thus have prayed for dismissal of the Complaint. 3. During the course of enquiry into the Complaint allegations, the Complainant and the Opposite party have filed their affidavit evidence reiterating their respective Complaint grievances and the version. The Opposite party has produced a copy of the stop payment letter given by the Complainant extract of the entries of register of stop payment of cheques maintained in their office and also account extract of their bank. The Complainant has produced copy of the legal notice he got issued to the Opposite party and copy of reply given by the Opposite party and an endorsement given by the Opposite party. Heard the counsel for both the parties and perused the records. 4. On the above contentions, following points for determination arise. 1. Whether the Complainant proves that despite issue of stop payment instructions and letter to the Opposite party to stop the payment of cheque bearing No.BBI-042416, the Opposite party has paid the cheque amount and thereby caused deficiency in its service? 2. Whether Complainant is entitled for the relief prayed for? 3. What order? 5. Our findings are as under:- Point no.1 : In the Negative. Point no.2 : In the Negative. Point no.3 : See the final order. REASONS 6.

Points no. 1 & 2:- The fact that the Complainant had an SB account with the Opposite party Bank is not in dispute. But the dispute arose between the parties with regard to stop payment of a cheque. According to the Complainant, he had instructed the Opposite party Bank orally and also issued a letter to stop payment of his cheque bearing No.042416 dated 16.09.2006 issued in favour of one Smt.Shamala. Whereas, the Opposite party has contended that the Complainant never instructed them to stop payment of cheque referred to above but the stop payment letter given to them by the Complainant was to stop payment of cheque bearing No.042418 dated 16.09.2006 and denied having received any stop payment letter on 20.09.2006 as alleged by the Complainant. 7. On perusal of the copy of the stop payment letter produced by the Opposite party it is manifest that the Complainant had given this letter to the Opposite party Manager to stop payment of cheque bearing No.042418 dated 16.09.2006 issued for Rs.34,000/- in favour of one Shamala, this letter is dated 18.09.2006. Accordingly, it is further found from the extract of register of stop payment of cheques, the cheque bearing No.042418 dated 16.09.2006 when presented to that bank the same was returned to the party presented without honouring it for payment and when the cheque bearing No.BB1042416 was presented by one Shamala on 05.10.2006 the same was honoured and passed for payment of Rs.34,000/-. Therefore, all these documents produced and relied on by the Opposite party go to show that they were never informed by the Complainant to stop payment of cheque bearing No.1042416. As against this, the Complainant has not been in a position to place anything before this Forum to show he had instructed the Opposite party Bank to stop payment of the cheque bearing No.042416. It is further found that when the Complainant got issued a legal notice to the Opposite party he had alleged that the Opposite party honoured the cheque bearing No.042416 despite issue of stop payment when the notice was replied by the Opposite party it had been categorically made clear that they did not receive any stop payment instructions from the Complainant in respect of cheque No.042416 and they had to honour that cheque when presented for encashment. The Complainant is therefore has failed to convince us, as how he could attribute deficiency to the Opposite party in their service in not stopping the payment of cheque No.042416. It emerges that there had been a mistake on the part of the Complainant when he gave a letter of stop payment who had mentioned wrong which cheque number has resulted in this anomaly. Therefore, we find no merits in this Complaint and the same is liable to be dismissed. With the result, we answer point nos.1 & 2 in the negative and pass the following order:- ORDER 1. The Complaint is dismissed. 2. Parties to bear their own costs. 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.