Research › Browse › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

1995 DIGILAW 176 (BOM)

Branch manager, Central Bank of India v. Pandharinath S. Shinde

1995-03-14

G.R.BEDGE, N.W.SAMBRE

body1995
JUDGMENT - W.M. SAMBRE, President :---Heard Mr. Jani, the learned Counsel for the appellant. He states that the observations of the District Forum, Yeotmal are not correct. In fact, refer to drawer means that the funds available with the bank are insufficient in the account of a person issuing the cheque. This aspect has been fully ignored by the District Forum and has wrongly relied upon the statement made by the representative of the bank. Therefore, Mr. Jani contended that the view taken by the District Forum in the circumstances is not proper and the same is liable to be quashed and set aside. 2. We have gone through the order of the District Forum. There is admission on the part of the representative of the bank. The complainant and the opposite parties were examined before the District Forum. The District Forum has observed that the representative of the bank has admitted the word refer to drawer means the drawer should see the owner. It does not mean that there is insufficient fund or no fund. In view of the statement, the District Forum was left with no other alternative but to pass the order directing the bank to pay interest @ 2% on the amount of the cheque till its realisation. 3. In view of the above discussion, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the District Forum and therefore, this appeal fails and stands dismissed. No costs. *****