West Bengal

South 24 Parganas

CC/438/2015

Mita Chowdhury. - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. Axis Bank. - Opp.Party(s)

20 Oct 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPLUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS ,

AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144

 

      C.C. CASE NO. _438_ OF ___2015_

 

DATE OF FILING : 20.09.2015                   DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:  20/10/2016

 

Present                        :   President       :   Udayan Mukhopadhyay

 

                                        Member(s)    :    Mrs. Sharmi Basu

                                                                             

COMPLAINANT             :     Mita Chowdhury, 54, Chandi Ghosh Road, Kolkata - 40

 

-VERSUS  -

 

O.P/O.Ps                       :  Axis Bank, 207, N.S.C. Bose Road, Tollygunge, Kolkata – 40, P.S. Regent

           Park.

_______________________________________________________________________

 

                                                            J  U  D  G  E  M  E  N  T

 

Sri Udayan Mukhopadhyay, President

The application under section 12 of the C.P Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant on the ground that  she went to the Axis Bank on 17.1.2015 with a cheque of ICICI Bank of Rs.4 lacs being cheque no. 761134 and wanted to make a term deposit for three years with a facility to withdraw before the maturity as she wanted to use the money for her medical emergency. It has further stated that one Mr. Arindam , an employee of Axis Bank attended her and explained that she will get back Rs.5.5 lacs after three years and will also have the required flexibility to withdraw before the term. It has stated that with that assurance she deposited the cheque on his savings bank account and also signed a Form on which said Arindam filled up all the details required for opening the terms deposit . But they did not give any FD certificate but assured that it will be sent to her through courier from Mumbai. Thereafter on 28^th January, when she went to the ATM counter ,she saw that Rs.4 lacs has been withdrawn from her account but did not provide any FD Certificate. Accordingly he requested the Bank authority and visited Bank Manager and came to learn that certificate is getting prepared. Accordingly he filed one complaint to the Axis Bank on 14^th February for non-receipt of the certificate. Copy attached. Thereafter two bank employees Mr. Arindam and Mr. Sabyasachi came to her home with a print out but no FD certificate. The print out did not have maturity amount. So, she refused to take it. It has stated that at that time said employees explained her that the same is not a fixed deposit for which maturity amount is not given any guarantee and accordingly he realized that she has been cheated due to unfairness of the bank employee. Hence, the complaint with a prayer to refund Rs. 4 lacs  along with 9% interest for the period the money is with the bank and compensation of Rs.2 lacs , litigation cost etc.

The O.P   bank contested the case by filing a written statement and has claimed that this case is not at all maintainable since the petition of complaint is wholly misconceived, groundless. . It is the positive case of the O.P that complainant is a savings bank account holder with the O.P Bank bearing account no. 914010055414329. She visited on and around mid of January, 2015 to deposit a cheque of Rs. 4 lacs but while she was waiting at the counter for her turn, she overheard one Branch official explaining about Axis Mutual Fund and its probable returns to another customer. At her turn the complainant had first deposited the cheque and then specifically enquired about the investment in Axis Mutual Fund from the Branch official. Accordingly when her turn has come complainant first deposited the said cheque and then specifically enquired about the investment in Axis Mutual Fund from the bank official and at the request of the complainant herself the bank official had explained details , its tenure, locking period, returns etc and also advised her to take to her family members and then on her confirmation investment can be made. It has further stated that when cheque was credited the complainant had again visited the branch Manager and stated her desire and also gave her consent to invest in the Axis Mutual Fund and complainant put her signature and signed the debit mandate which is annexed herewith. It has strongly claimed by the Bank that the bank officials repeatedly explained that this particular investment is not a fixed deposit but similar to fixed deposit with a locking period of 42 months . Being satisfied and understanding about the probable return complainant invested the money in the mutual fund. Thus, complainant’s allegation that she was misled by the bank staff and assured to return Rs.5.5 lacs are all baseless and without any corroborative evidence. It has claimed that thereafter complainant came to the branch on several occasions and had misbehaved with the staff and alleged that she was not provided any investment receipt along with the fixed return amount on the receipt. Accordingly two branch officials had subsequently visited the complainant’s residence where branch officials were subjected to humiliation and threatened by the complainant and her daughter. Although mutual fund account statement which branch officials had carried with them to deliver to the complainant was not received by her. Thus her allegation of non-supply of investment receipts is baseless and false. It has strongly claimed that the intention of the complainant is vexatious in nature and should be dealt whereby such tendency of putting false complaint can be carved and allegation of negligence or deficiency in service are wholly misconceived, groundless, and false besides being extraneous and irrelevant. Hence, the O.ps prays for dismissal of the case with heavy cost.

Point for decision in this case is whether the O.P Bank actually explained about the deposit in mutual fund and not in the fixed deposit and whether the intention of the complainant was to keep the account in FD or mutual fund.

                                                            Decision with reasons

On perusal of the questions put by the complainant to the bank i.e. question no.3 wherein complainant explained that while she is going to deposit such a claim which is unknown to her and there is no guarantee of return, so in the name of FD the same was done. In reply the bank authority has stated the complainant has not investee in normal FD but has invested in mutual fund which is a mandatory fixed locking period of 42 months. The said answer clearly suggest that on the face of the mutual fund deposit the answer was given . But fact remains how the complainant came to  learn about the mutual fund investment. On the contrary every one is aware regarding the FD. Moreover, complainant is a very senior citizen ,definitely her intention was to deposit in the FD scheme not in mutual fund where return is not guaranteed. Moreover, how the complainant is claiming he will get back Rs.5.5 lacs. Definitely there was an assurance from the bank authority namely Mr. Arindam which is mentioned in the complaint petition, otherwise how a senior lady citizen knows all these mutual fund etc. So, definitely employees  who are of bank authority misled the senior citizen Mita Chowdhury  , the complainant taking advantage her old age and when she was not assisted with any of the family members.

Considering all these aspects this type of unfairness is required to be stopped, that is why, a senior citizen comes before us for actual redressal in the matter of unfairness acted upon by the Axis Bank.

We  have nothing to disbelieve the statement of this Senior lady complainant and at this age definitely  she will not play with her his good money investing in a mutual fund. Rather, it is probable to keep in a fixed deposit. Thus, taking the innocence of the old age of the complainant bank authority obtained the signature after filling up the necessary mutual fund form which is undoubtedly unfair. It is an admitted in para 4 of the written version of the O.P that complainant came to the branch on several occasions and had misbehaved with the bank staff and alleged that she was not provided with the investment receipt along with the fixed return amount on the receipt. This admission clearly suggests that complainant was misled or misgiven by the employees of the bank and thereby her good money was invested in the mutual fund which is not the desire of the complainant and if it was the desire then definitely complainant never visited the branch after investment. Thus the conduct of the complaint  which is admittedly coming out from the written statement of the O.P Bank at para 4 of their written version, clearly indicates that needle of suspicious goes against the employees of the O.P Bank, otherwise, complainant could not visit the O.P Bank for the certificate and prays for return of the amount which was assured at the time of signing mutual fund investment.

Apart from that, a senior citizen normally does not like to keep any amount where locking period is 42 months. This is the normal conduct of the senior citizen and he has informed the Branch Manager accordingly. So, we hold that the complainant has been able to prove her allegation that the employees of the bank namely Mr. Arindam & others which is mentioned in the complaint petition clearly acted unfairness for investing the complainant’s good money of Rs.4 lacs in the mutual fund which is undoubtedly the glaring example of unfair trade practice.

Accordingly, it is

                                                                        Ordered

That the O.P Bank is directed to refund Rs.4 lacs to the complainant along with interest @9% on and from 27.1.2015 to till its realization ( 27.1.2015 is the date of withdrawal of amount of Rs.4 lacs) within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which, O.P has to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.25000/- and if the said amount along with interest is paid within the time, then compensation is not at all required. But after the stipulated period the amount of compensation will be imposed and the said amount of compensation has to be paid within 45 days from the date of expiry.

The O.P bank is also directed to pay the litigation cost of Rs.2000/- within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order through this Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P through speed post.

                                                     Member                                                                  President

 

Dictated and corrected by me

                               

                        President

 

 

The judgment in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,

           

                                                            Ordered

That the O.P Bank is directed to refund Rs.4 lacs to the complainant along with interest @9% on and from 27.1.2015 to till its realization ( 27.1.2015 is the date of withdrawal of amount of Rs.4 lacs) within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which, O.P has to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.25000/- and if the said amount along with interest is paid within the time, then compensation is not at all required. But after the stipulated period the amount of compensation will be imposed and the said amount of compensation has to be paid within 45 days from the date of expiry.

The O.P bank is also directed to pay the litigation cost of Rs.2000/- within 30 days from the date of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the order through this Forum.

Let a plain copy of this order be served upon the complainant free of cost and one copy be sent to the O.P through speed post.

                                                     Member                                                                  President