sir, thanks, I visited the same and it was very useful. I need some more blind achievers from India in e.text, if anybody has any idea about any other source please tell me. regards Vimal Dengla Principal NAB, Mount Abu Mob. No. 09414244549 E-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 2:39 PM Subject: AccessIndia Digest, Vol 27, Issue 17
> Send AccessIndia mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of AccessIndia digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Bank Guidelines (Chetan Sharma) > 2. Re: my Introduction (Ram Kumar) > 3. Re: Bank Guidelines (Pamnani) > 4. Re: Bank Guidelines (Geetha Shamanna) > 5. Re: some out standing blind persons in india (Chetan Sharma) > 6. Re: some out standing blind persons in india (George Abraham) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 14:01:03 +0530 > From: "Chetan Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Hi rajesh, harish and others! > > I fully agree that giving a check book signed and duly attested by Bank > officials to a VI customer is definitely a risky affair. In certain > situations, such check books can easily be used to our disadvantage. > Similarly, if we leave this issue for IBA officials to decide, one can > easily imagine with what sort of guidelines they will come up. As far as > verifying the issuance of check over phone is concerned, it may work in > few > situations but making this a part of guideline seems to be more > difficult. > What if my Banker passes a check and according to them it was verified > over > phone, but I say it was not? what if the customer is out of town and not > reachable through phone? even in case of cell phones, if customer is out > of network, what decision a banker would or should take? I think certain > things may be allright in practice but when it comes to their > incorporation in guidelines, there shouldn't be any room for ambiguity. > More over, it is very difficult for either party to prove their case in a > court of law. In one way or other,every party to a negotiable instrument > should be reasonably accommodated, be it Vi customer or Bank. Suggesting a > fool proof system is a huge task, perhaps impossible. if we suggest > that > In case of all third party account payee checks, an undertaking from the > VI customer can be obtain that bank should pass all third party account > payee checks (crossed checks) issued by the VI customers irrespective > of > variations in signatures, anyone can use the check book of a VI customer > and > Bank officials will not be liable for anything since they have the > undertaking of the customer. If we ask banks to be lenient while verifying > the signature of VI customers, what precisely is or should be the limit > of > that leniency? in this case, bank officials will be more hesitant to open > the account of VI customers because the level of leniency is to be > decided > by them and they can be held liable. wondering what modus opperendy is > used > in USA or other countries to pay bearer checks of VI customers? in my > humble opinion option of giving an undertaking is more practicable. as > we > all know, the collecting Banker, in case of a crossed check is legally > bound > to collect the check in good faith and without any negligence. it means > that > check issued in favour of x can not be collected in y's account. With > K.Y.C. > norms becoming more stringent it is comparatively easy to trace the > customer > in whose account proceeds of a crossed check have been credited. > . As far as payment of cash is concerned according to me for the time > being, > we may rely on ATMs. I am reproducing few sections of Negotiable > instrument > act, 1881 which defines the rights and responsibilities of various parties > to a negotiable instrument. > > > > 123.Cheque crossed generally. Where a cheque bears across its > > face an addition of the words "and company " or any abbreviation > > thereof, between two parallel transverse lines, or of two parallel > > transverse lines simply, either with or without the words " not > > negotiable," that addition shall be deemed a crossing, and the cheque > > shall be deemed to be crossed generally. > > > > > > 124. > > > > Cheque crossed specially. > > > > > > 124.Cheque crossed specially. Where a cheque bears across its > > face an addition of the name of a banker, either with or without the > > words " not negotiable," that addition shall be deemed a crossing, and > > the cheque shall be deemed to be crossed specially, and to be crossed > > to that banker. > > > > > > 125. > > > > Crossing after issue. > > > > > > 125.Crossing after issue. Where a cheque is uncrossed, the holder > > may cross it generally or specially. > > > > > > Where a cheque is crossed generally, the holder may cross it > > specially. > > > > Where a cheque is crossed generally or specially, the holder > > may add the words"' not negotiable". > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 1 Subs. by Act 8 of 1919, s. 5, for " payable to, or to the order of, > > a specified person ". > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > Where a cheque is crossed specially, the banker to whom it is > > crossed may again cross it specially to another banker. his > > agent, for collection. > > > > > > > > 126. > > > > Payment of cheque crossed generally. > > > > > > 126.Payment of cheque crossed generally. Where a cheque is > > crossed generally, the banker on whom it is drawn shall not pay it > > otherwise than to a banker. > > > > Payment of cheque crossed specially. Where a cheque is crossed > > specially, the banker on whom it is drawn shall not pay it otherwise > > than to the banker to whom it is crossed, or his agent for collection. > > > > > > > > 127. > > > > Payment of cheque crossed specially more than once. > > > > > > 127.Payment of cheque crossed specially more than once.Where a > > cheque is crossed specially to more than one banker, except when > > crossed to an agent for the purpose of collection, the banker on whom > > it is drawn shall refuse payment thereof. > > > > > > 128. > > > > Payment in due course of crossed cheque. > > > > > > 128.Payment in due course of crossed cheque.Where the banker on > > whom a crossed cheque is drawn- has paid the same in due course, the > > banker paying the cheque, and in case such cheque has come to the > > hands of the payee) the drawer thereof, shall respectively be entitled > > to the same rights, and be placed in the same position in all > > respects, as they would respectively be entitled to and placed in if > > the amount of the cheque bad been paid to and received by the true > > owner thereof. > > > > > > > > 129. > > > > Payment of crossed cheque out of due course. > > > > > > 129.Payment of crossed cheque out of due course.Any banker > > paying a cheque crossed generally otherwise than to a banker, or a > > cheque crossed specially otherwise than to the banker to whom the same > > is crossed, or his agent for collection, being a banker, shall be > > liable to the true owner of the cheque for any loss he may sustain > > owing to the cheque having been so paid. > > > > > > > > 130. > > > > Cheque bearing "not negotiable". > > > > > > 130.Cheque bearing "not negotiable". A person taking a cheque > > crossed generally or specially, bearing in either case the words " not > > negotiable," shall not have, and shall not be capable of giving, a > > better title to the cheque than that which the person from whom he > > took it had. > > > > > > 131. > > > > Non-liability of banker receiving payment of cheque. > > > > > > 131.Non-liability of banker receiving payment of cheque. A banker > > who has in good faith and without negligence received payment for a > > customer of a cheque crossed generally or specially to himself shall > > not, in case the title to the cheque proves defective, incur any > > liability to, the true owner of the cheque by reason only of having > > received such payment. > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harish Kotian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 10:10 PM > Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines > > >> Hi Rajesh >> >> This will be like signing all the cheque leaves and expecting the blind >> person to take care of it. Would any able bodied person accept such a >> situation? This will certainly be unacceptable. Besides, it won't give >> any >> security to the banks as the blind customer is forced into a situation >> which is intrensically liable for cheating. This would be a very bad >> guidelines. >> >> A more sensible approach which will provide both security and comfort >> both >> to the customer and the blind is that the bank may seek confirmation by >> phone whenever they have doubt about the genuineness of the signature on >> the instrument. >> >> If the customer has high volume of cheque use then the banker knows the >> patterns of change of signature and can use the phone option when in >> need. >> If the volume is low, anyway it should not be a big financial drain. >> >> This can be a prudent practise and this should not go as guidelines. Now >> a >> days insisting of carrying a phone is not a big deal. >> >> I understand, Some banks are already exercising this option. >> >> So, in the guidelines, we can leave it to the banks to draw their own >> safeguards. >> >> This could be one option, there could be more and we can keep room for >> it. >> >> Harish. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Rajesh Asudani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 5:57 PM >> Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines >> >> >>> Worries in attestation clause are two: >>> >>> 1. risk of theft and misuse; >>> >>> It can be easily tackled by safe custody which is the responsibility of >>> customer anyway when it comes to credit card etc. and issuing stop >>> payment instruction immediately upon such an occurrence. >>> >>> It should be weighed against forgery which would be prevented >>> effectively >>> by attestation clause and ease in passing cheques by bank officials >>> without leniency etc. >>> >>> 2. Something enterim becoming permanent in India. >>> >>> Well, it is the fault of system, and biometric technology may take much >>> longer to be universally installed and used than is being envisaged >>> here. >>> And, even if a beneficial measure is firmly entrenched, we may gradually >>> drag it out in favor of ease of other technology which will be >>> eventually >>> realized by one and all. Many detrimental practices have gained firm >>> ground in indian system, many enterim measures like reservations for >>> Certain casts have become "basic structure" of polity, so to say! So >>> even >>> if attestation becomes firmly rooted, at least it is not going to harm >>> us. I am sure biometric technology would eventually phase it out. >>> >>> To sum up, twin advantages of preventing forgery by combating >>> inconsistency of signature and relieving bankers of unnecessary anxiety >>> about accounts of VI, do outway harms of possible theft and permanence >>> of >>> practice which may be forestalled by stop payment instructions in first >>> case and enlightened petitions in later. Forgery on one hand is clearly >>> liability of bankers from which they endeavor to save their skin and >>> largely undetectable unless it has already caused damage, unlike theft >>> which comes to notice of owner easily and with preventable damage. >>> >>> Rest I leave to you all, but please do not misinterpret me or assume >>> that >>> I merely write for semantic jugglery and merit only the slightest >>> consideration, if at all!!! >>> >>> I am, at present unaware of any other objections to my suggestion as >>> those having them have chosen not to enlighten me about them, if put >>> publicly on this list or mailed to me in private, I will be in a >>> position >>> to endeavor to answer them only when the stipulated time would have >>> expired, as I am leaving for weekend. >>> >>> Rajesh >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pamnani >>> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:37 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: [AI] Bank Guidelines >>> >>> Hi Friends, I have incorporated most of the suggestions. There is one >>> issue on which I want some brain storming. >>> This is regarding cheques issued by the visually impaired. >>> In the general guidelines I have suggested that banks should introduce >>> biometric verification or seals etc. >>> >>> Now to be honest most banks dont have a system to verify at present and >>> cannot do so for atleast 6 months. >>> So what do we do in the interim for cheques which have thumb impression >>> and for cheques on which signature does not tally. I had said there >>> should be some leniency during verification. >>> >>> I have received a suggestion from one member that banks should be asked >>> to attest our signature or thumb impression when they give us our cheque >>> book. So the empty chequeswith only our signature and the attestation >>> will be lying with us. >>> The worry is that we can lose the cheque book and that someone can fill >>> up details and withdraw from our account. >>> The other problem is that our cheques look different and that all banks >>> would insist on it. >>> If we do think of attestation then it will be as an interim measure >>> until >>> biometric. You all know in India to get this attestation out of the >>> system it will take 5 yearts and something which is interim will become >>> permant. >>> >>> So should I put in this attestation clause or leave it now and let the >>> IBA suggest it if necessary and deal with it then? >>> >>> Need feedback by 9.30 am Monday morning. >>> Come on lets start the debate. >>> Kanchan >>> Kanchan Pamnani >>> Advocate & Solicitor >>> 9, Suleman Chambers, >>> Battery Street, Colaba, >>> Mumbai - 400 039. >>> >>> >>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>> >>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>> please visit the list home page at >>> >>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>> >>> Notice: The information contained in this e-mail >>> message and/or attachments to it may contain >>> confidential or privileged information. If you are >>> not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, >>> review, distribution, printing or copying of the >>> information contained in this e-mail message >>> and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If >>> you have received this communication in error, >>> please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and >>> immediately and permanently delete the message >>> and any attachments. Thank you >>> >>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>> >>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>> please visit the list home page at >>> >>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>> >> >> >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:58:31 +0530 > From: "Ram Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] my Introduction > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hai Akilesh, pleased to read your first mail to access india. Keeping > posting iinformative things. > > On 7/5/08, Akhilesh Malani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am Akhilesh malani from Chennai/India. >> >> This is my 1st email to AccessIndia. >> >> I have completed my graduation a reputed college in B.A. in english >> literature. >> >> As I am most intrested in computer programming so I am going to do my >> PostGraduation in MCA from IGNO Mumbai. >> >> I have already finished completed my computer basics and in programming I >> ahave completed C, C++ and JAVA. >> >> Currently I am learning DotNet and related programming languages. >> >> well if anybody feels that I can help them then can contact me on either >> on >> skype or via email or by mobile. >> >> My skype ID: akhi_25thcentury >> Email ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Mobile no: +91-9840226825 >> >> I think for now its enough... >> >> >> >> >> Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now, on >> http://help.yahoo.com/l/in/yahoo/mail/yahoomail/tools/tools-08.html/ >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with >> the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please >> visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > -- > With wishes, D, Ramkumar, PHD Scholar in English, Pondicherry > university (a central University). Mobile: 09952990192 home: 0413 > 3290383 > skipe name: ramkumarpondicherry alternate email id: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:55:31 +0530 > From: "Pamnani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > The problem at present is not of whether a phone call is too much for us > or > not but of our security. > As Harish suggested I am not putting the phone call into the guidelines > but > leaving it as it is. > The only question is should we suggest that our cheques should be attested > or not. If not we can leave it until the IBA suggests it and then discuss > it. If the IBA does not suggest anything then we can insist that the Banks > must expedite for Biometric verification. > > Kanchan Pamnani > Advocate & Solicitor > 9, Suleman Chambers, > Battery Street, Colaba, > Mumbai - 400 039. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ketan Kothari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 11:35 AM > Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines > > >> Though this sounds practical and salutary, knowing the tendencies of the >> bank officials, they may not want to accept the new phone verification. >> Also, it may not be possible for us to answer the phone all the time and >> thus may lead to delay. >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Harish Kotian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 10:10 PM >> Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines >> >> >>> Hi Rajesh >>> >>> This will be like signing all the cheque leaves and expecting the blind >>> person to take care of it. Would any able bodied person accept such a >>> situation? This will certainly be unacceptable. Besides, it won't give >>> any >>> security to the banks as the blind customer is forced into a situation >>> which is intrensically liable for cheating. This would be a very bad >>> guidelines. >>> >>> A more sensible approach which will provide both security and comfort >>> both >>> to the customer and the blind is that the bank may seek confirmation by >>> phone whenever they have doubt about the genuineness of the signature on >>> the instrument. >>> >>> If the customer has high volume of cheque use then the banker knows the >>> patterns of change of signature and can use the phone option when in >>> need. >>> If the volume is low, anyway it should not be a big financial drain. >>> >>> This can be a prudent practise and this should not go as guidelines. Now >>> a >>> days insisting of carrying a phone is not a big deal. >>> >>> I understand, Some banks are already exercising this option. >>> >>> So, in the guidelines, we can leave it to the banks to draw their own >>> safeguards. >>> >>> This could be one option, there could be more and we can keep room for >>> it. >>> >>> Harish. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Rajesh Asudani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 5:57 PM >>> Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines >>> >>> >>>> Worries in attestation clause are two: >>>> >>>> 1. risk of theft and misuse; >>>> >>>> It can be easily tackled by safe custody which is the responsibility of >>>> customer anyway when it comes to credit card etc. and issuing stop >>>> payment instruction immediately upon such an occurrence. >>>> >>>> It should be weighed against forgery which would be prevented >>>> effectively >>>> by attestation clause and ease in passing cheques by bank officials >>>> without leniency etc. >>>> >>>> 2. Something enterim becoming permanent in India. >>>> >>>> Well, it is the fault of system, and biometric technology may take much >>>> longer to be universally installed and used than is being envisaged >>>> here. >>>> And, even if a beneficial measure is firmly entrenched, we may >>>> gradually >>>> drag it out in favor of ease of other technology which will be >>>> eventually >>>> realized by one and all. Many detrimental practices have gained firm >>>> ground in indian system, many enterim measures like reservations for >>>> Certain casts have become "basic structure" of polity, so to say! So >>>> even >>>> if attestation becomes firmly rooted, at least it is not going to harm >>>> us. I am sure biometric technology would eventually phase it out. >>>> >>>> To sum up, twin advantages of preventing forgery by combating >>>> inconsistency of signature and relieving bankers of unnecessary anxiety >>>> about accounts of VI, do outway harms of possible theft and permanence >>>> of >>>> practice which may be forestalled by stop payment instructions in first >>>> case and enlightened petitions in later. Forgery on one hand is clearly >>>> liability of bankers from which they endeavor to save their skin and >>>> largely undetectable unless it has already caused damage, unlike theft >>>> which comes to notice of owner easily and with preventable damage. >>>> >>>> Rest I leave to you all, but please do not misinterpret me or assume >>>> that >>>> I merely write for semantic jugglery and merit only the slightest >>>> consideration, if at all!!! >>>> >>>> I am, at present unaware of any other objections to my suggestion as >>>> those having them have chosen not to enlighten me about them, if put >>>> publicly on this list or mailed to me in private, I will be in a >>>> position >>>> to endeavor to answer them only when the stipulated time would have >>>> expired, as I am leaving for weekend. >>>> >>>> Rajesh >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pamnani >>>> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:37 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [AI] Bank Guidelines >>>> >>>> Hi Friends, I have incorporated most of the suggestions. There is one >>>> issue on which I want some brain storming. >>>> This is regarding cheques issued by the visually impaired. >>>> In the general guidelines I have suggested that banks should introduce >>>> biometric verification or seals etc. >>>> >>>> Now to be honest most banks dont have a system to verify at present and >>>> cannot do so for atleast 6 months. >>>> So what do we do in the interim for cheques which have thumb impression >>>> and for cheques on which signature does not tally. I had said there >>>> should be some leniency during verification. >>>> >>>> I have received a suggestion from one member that banks should be asked >>>> to attest our signature or thumb impression when they give us our >>>> cheque >>>> book. So the empty chequeswith only our signature and the attestation >>>> will be lying with us. >>>> The worry is that we can lose the cheque book and that someone can fill >>>> up details and withdraw from our account. >>>> The other problem is that our cheques look different and that all banks >>>> would insist on it. >>>> If we do think of attestation then it will be as an interim measure >>>> until >>>> biometric. You all know in India to get this attestation out of the >>>> system it will take 5 yearts and something which is interim will become >>>> permant. >>>> >>>> So should I put in this attestation clause or leave it now and let the >>>> IBA suggest it if necessary and deal with it then? >>>> >>>> Need feedback by 9.30 am Monday morning. >>>> Come on lets start the debate. >>>> Kanchan >>>> Kanchan Pamnani >>>> Advocate & Solicitor >>>> 9, Suleman Chambers, >>>> Battery Street, Colaba, >>>> Mumbai - 400 039. >>>> >>>> >>>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>>> >>>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>>> please visit the list home page at >>>> >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>>> >>>> Notice: The information contained in this e-mail >>>> message and/or attachments to it may contain >>>> confidential or privileged information. If you are >>>> not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, >>>> review, distribution, printing or copying of the >>>> information contained in this e-mail message >>>> and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If >>>> you have received this communication in error, >>>> please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and >>>> immediately and permanently delete the message >>>> and any attachments. Thank you >>>> >>>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>>> >>>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>>> please visit the list home page at >>>> >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>>> >>> >>> >>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>> >>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>> please visit the list home page at >>> >>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> >> >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 14:15:51 +0530 > From: "Geetha Shamanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] Bank Guidelines > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Hi Kanchan, > > The biometric system would be good. However, until such a system could be > introduced, banks could do the following: > On receiving a check signed by a blind person for clearance, the concerned > bank could call the customer and verify whether the check was issued by > the > customer. Unless the customer in question is operating a current account > and > issues several checks daily, banks should not find this procedure > cumbersome. > > Since my signature is never the same twice, my bank (Citibank) calls to > confirm the issuance of a check if the amount exceeds Rs.50000. It passes > checks below 50000 without verifying the issuance of the check. > > Geetha > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pamnani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 4:37 PM > Subject: [AI] Bank Guidelines > > >> Hi Friends, I have incorporated most of the suggestions. There is one >> issue on which I want some brain storming. >> This is regarding cheques issued by the visually impaired. >> In the general guidelines I have suggested that banks should introduce >> biometric verification or seals etc. >> >> Now to be honest most banks dont have a system to verify at present and >> cannot do so for atleast 6 months. >> So what do we do in the interim for cheques which have thumb impression >> and for cheques on which signature does not tally. I had said there >> should >> be some leniency during verification. >> >> I have received a suggestion from one member that banks should be asked >> to >> attest our signature or thumb impression when they give us our cheque >> book. So the empty chequeswith only our signature and the attestation >> will >> be lying with us. >> The worry is that we can lose the cheque book and that someone can fill >> up >> details and withdraw from our account. >> The other problem is that our cheques look different and that all banks >> would insist on it. >> If we do think of attestation then it will be as an interim measure until >> biometric. You all know in India to get this attestation out of the >> system >> it will take 5 yearts and something which is interim will become permant. >> >> So should I put in this attestation clause or leave it now and let the >> IBA >> suggest it if necessary and deal with it then? >> >> Need feedback by 9.30 am Monday morning. >> Come on lets start the debate. >> Kanchan >> Kanchan Pamnani >> Advocate & Solicitor >> 9, Suleman Chambers, >> Battery Street, Colaba, >> Mumbai - 400 039. >> >> >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 14:43:37 +0530 > From: "Chetan Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] some out standing blind persons in india > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > I think AICB, Delhi published a list of fourty such individuals few years > back and it is available in Braille. for more information contact them at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Regards, > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "vimaldengla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 7:50 PM > Subject: [AI] some out standing blind persons in india > > >> dear friends, >> I need the brief history of some of the outstanding blind achievers in >> India, who have got the respectable place in society and in their working >> areas? please send me the brief history of some blind persons or tell me >> how to get it? >> >> with regards >> vimal dengla >> mob. 9414244549 >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 14:39:47 +0530 > From: "George Abraham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [AI] some out standing blind persons in india > To: "Chetan Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Hi, > > You can also visit the Achievers section on www.eyeway.org . you will find > profiles of a few people. > > Regards, > > George > George Abraham > CEO > Score Foundation > Y-70, Lower Ground Floor, > Hauz Khas, > New Delhi 110016 > India > > Ph:+91 11 26852581, +91 11 26852559 > Fax:+91 11 26852559 > Mobile: +91 9810934040 > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Website: www.eyeway.org > Eyeway Help Desk: +91 11 46070380 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chetan Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 2:43 PM > Subject: Re: [AI] some out standing blind persons in india > > >>I think AICB, Delhi published a list of fourty such individuals few years >> back and it is available in Braille. for more information contact them at >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Regards, >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "vimaldengla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 7:50 PM >> Subject: [AI] some out standing blind persons in india >> >> >>> dear friends, >>> I need the brief history of some of the outstanding blind achievers in >>> India, who have got the respectable place in society and in their >>> working >>> areas? please send me the brief history of some blind persons or tell me >>> how to get it? >>> >>> with regards >>> vimal dengla >>> mob. 9414244549 >>> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >>> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>> >>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>> please visit the list home page at >>> >>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>> >> >> >> >> Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: >> http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please visit the list home page at >> >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > AccessIndia mailing list > [email protected] > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > End of AccessIndia Digest, Vol 27, Issue 17 > ******************************************* Join Access India convention: For updates on it visit: http://accessindia.org.in/harish/convention.htm To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
