Court No. - 54
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 47066 of 2012 Petitioner :- Punjab National Bank Basti Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Vaish Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A. Sahai,Amrish Sahai,Pankaj Kumar Tripathi,Pankaj Kushwaha,R.B.Sahai,S.K. Tiwari,Suresh Chandra Kushwaha,Vipin Sinha
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has questioned the correctness of the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat dated 8th of August, 2012 whereby the petitioner has been fastened with the liability to pay back Rs. 93,703/-, the amount in respect of which the cheque had been misplaced during transition for purposes initiated at the end of the petitioner and also Rs. 20,000/- towards damages and mental harassment with 12% interest over the decreed amount.
Admitted facts, in narrow compass, can be sketched like this that the petitioner who was having a contract of work assigned by Prayagraj Power Generation Company was issued a cheque of Rs. 93,703/- payable at State Bank of India, Shankergarh, Branch. The petitioner who had executed the work under the work order issued by the Power Generation Company at Basti deposited the said cheque in his saving bank account no. 3143010100023332 of Punjab National Bank on 24th March, 2011. Since the cheque was payable at Bhartiya State Bank Branch, Shankergarh, Allahabad, the petitioner sent the same through courier services for clearance, however, it appears some mischief took place and through an account got opened at the main branch of the Bhartiya State Bank Allahabad No. 31712214470 on 19.4.2011 the same was deposited there in the same account and was encashed on 21st October, 2011.
The petitioner raised demand for non-payment of the amount in spite of cheque being deposited but remained uncleared when the demand was not met he instituted Case No. 17 of 2012 which was tried before the permanent Lok Adalat, Basti. The Lok Adalat after examining the records and considering the arguments of the parties found the bank, namely, the petitioner to be at fault, insofar as the liability for payment of cheque is concerned to the petitioner. After carefully going through the facts pleaded by the rival parties the Lok Adalat returned a finding that the petitioner was not at all liable for non-payment and he had rightly deposited the cheque in his account and if the bank was sending the same through courier service for clearance to another district it ought to have taken adequate measure that the cheque could not get misplaced and no mischief could be committed. The court found that the State Bank of India and the State Bank main branch are equally liable for such withdrawal of money through mischief. In view of the opinion of the Lok Adalat adequate measures were not adopted by these banks and even the respondents no. 2 and 3 did not contest the matter after even filing the written statement and thus a decree was passed for payment of Rs. 93,000 and odd along with Rs. 20,000/- as damages with 12% interest.
From the findings of facts that have come to be recorded, the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner could have taken adequate measure to communicate about the non-payment of cheque in time does not appeal to reason. The liability has been fastened upon the petitioner and other respondent bank are based on cogent and convincing findings of fact which this Court does not find any reason to interfere.
The writ petition accordingly lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. The respondents are entitled for realization of dues from the decree and order passed by the Lok Adalat dated 8.8.2012 and in this regard the appropriate steps shall be taken by the contesting respondent no. 3 in accordance with law.
Consequence to follow.
Order Date :- 26.7.2019 Nadeem Ahmad