Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In the present case, a revision petition was filed by the Bank of Baroda against the order of the State Commission. The petition was dismissed by the commission. In this case a cheque was deposited by the Respondent in the Petitioner’s bank which was dishonoured. It was contended by the bank that the cheque was sent to his registered post address but it was returned unserved back to the bank. Hence, there is no fault of it. On the other handthe Respondent alleged that he requested the bank to return the cheque several times. He even personally visited the bank to collect the cheque but he was denied.
The district court party allowed the complaint. Subsequently, the State Commission found the bank guilty and directed the bank to pay full amount of the cheque which was Rs. 3,60,000. However, the bank filed the present Revision petition under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order of the State Commission.
The NCDRC took into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and came to the conclusion that while the dishonoured cheque was returned unserved from the postal address of the Respondent, the same was not returned to him on any later occasion. Rather, the bank lost it as a result of which Respondent was not able to file a case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Taking into consideration all of this the NCDRC decided not to interfere with the order of the State Commission.
86540
103860
630
114
59824