Shashikala Prabhu, the complainant, had an account with the bank since '84. In the beginning of '98, while updating her pass book, she discovered that her bank balance had fallen short by Rs 1,05,000. It was found that the amount had been withdrawn by three cheques for Rs 35,000, Rs 20,000 and Rs 50,000 within a span of five days in the month of January. At the time, Prabhu had two cheque books, each containing a requisition slip for a new one.

Prabhu learnt that the bank had issued a new cheque book to a third party on the basis of a forged requisition slip which did not bear the stamp of the bank or its officer, date of issue or the old series. The complainant also learnt that cash was withdrawn by forging her signatures on the threecheques from the cheque book issued to the third party. She filed an FIR with the police and acquired copies of the forged slips and cheques. Later she complained to the bank, as well as forwarded a copy of the complaint to the Reserve Bank of India, where she asked the bank to re-credit her account with the said amount. However, when the bank refused to take any action, she filed a case at the consumer court.

During the course of the hearing, the Syndicate Bank asked Prabhu and her brother, who would also carry out transactions on behalf of his sister, to give their handwriting specimens for reference to the Government Examiner of Question Documents (GEQD). This opinion of the GEQD was suppressed by the bank till the date of the final hearing. In his argument, advocate Chottany, who appeared on behalf of the bank, said since the cheques had been passed in due course, there was no question of any kind of negligence.

Jehangir Gai, appearing on behalf of the complainant, argued that the fault lay in theissue of the cheque book in the first place. It had been issued without verifying the signature of the complainant on the basis of a fraudulent requisition slip.

The forum in its order held the bank officer concerned guilty for the lapse. It directed the bank to pay the sum of Rs 1,05,000 to the complainant with five per cent interest within two months or 18 per cent interest if it was not paid within that period. It also asked the bank to recover the said amount with interest from the erring officer in suitable installments.