HDFC Bank told to pay Rs 5.2 lakh for misplacing cheque

Complaint had said that he had deposited a cheque of Rs 5 lakh in his HDFC account on November 16, 2011 which was not credited to his account but to someone else

Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jun 06 2013 | 6:18 PM IST
HDFC Bank has been directed by a consumer forum here to pay Rs 5.2 lakh to one of its account holders for misplacing a cheque deposited by him and causing him a loss of Rs 5 lakh.

The East District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum on the basis of the bank's admission that the cheque was pilfered by someone while being sent to another branch for clearing said the account holder cannot be penalised for the negligence of HDFC and held it liable to pay him the amount.

"It is discerned, (from the bank's submissions) that the cheque in question deposited by complainant was got misplaced at opposite party's (HDFC) end and they are liable to either credit the amount to complainant or return the cheque.

"As such we find the bank is liable to pay the amount of cheque," a bench headed by N A Zaidi said and directed the bank to pay Delhi resident Naveen Kumar Rs 5 lakh, in place of the misplaced cheque, along with Rs 20,000 as litigation cost.

Kumar in his complaint had said that he had deposited a cheque of Rs 5 lakh in his HDFC account on November 16, 2011 which was not credited to his account but to someone else and alleged that the bank had cheated him.

HDFC Bank in its defence had refuted the allegation and contended that the cheque which was drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank was pilfered by unknown persons while being sent for clearing through a courier company.

HDFC had also said that when it initiated enquiries, it found that the cheque was cleared and encashed in favour of some other Naveen Kumar having an account in Indus Bank.

It had further said that a police complaint had been filed and the matter was being investigated by the cops and the same was communicated to the complainant.

The forum rejected the bank's contentions saying Kumar "cannot be penalised for negligence committed by bank or its agents as he has no control over them. It is for the bank to take action against their defaulting employees/agents and to get the losses indemnified".
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jun 06 2013 | 6:15 PM IST

Next Story