DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS , AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR,
KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. __116 _ OF ___2018
DATE OF FILING :_9.10.2018 DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 7.5.2019
Present : President : Ananta Kumar Kapri
Member(s) : Jhunu Prasad
COMPLAINANT : Dr. Jay Prakash Gupta, son of late Sri Ram Chandra Gupta of Ram Krishna Dham, Doltala Puratan Bazar, P.O & P.S Baruipur, Dist. South 24-Parganas, Kolkata-144.
O.P/O.Ps : 1. State Bank of India, Baruipur Branch, Zilla Parisad Building, Kulpi Road, P.O & P.S Baruipur, Dist. South 24-Parganas, Kolkata-144.
2. Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Zilla Parisad Building, Kulpi Road, P.O & P.S Baruipur, Dist. South 24-Parganas, Kolkata-144.
Proforma O.P : 3. IFB Industries Ltd. 14, Taratalla Road, Kolkata-88.
_________________________________________________________________
J U D G M E N T
Sri Ananta Kumar Kapri, President
Return of three cheques lackadaisically to the complainant by the O.P Bank has galvanized the complainant to file the instant case under section 12 , C.P Act, 1986 , alleging gross deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps Bank .
Facts leading to the filing of the instant case may be epitomized as follows.
The complainant deposited three cheques of HDFC Bank – Cheque no. 010093 of Rs.1320/-, cheque no. 010094 of Rs.8989/- and cheque no. 010095 of Rs.2000/- , issued by IFB Industries Ltd. , O.P-3 in favour of the complainant on 28.8.2018, for the amounts being credited to his SB account no.10400343915 maintained with O.P nos. 1 and 2. The said cheques were issued in favour of the complainant by O.P-3 in compliance of order of Hon’ble State Commission, West Bengal , in appeal no.A/147/2018 passed on 3.8.2018. But, cheques were not encashed even after 18 days of their deposit. So, the complainant sent a letter dated 15.9.2018 to the Bank authority asking them to let him know the reason for non-clearance of the cheques. Thereafter cheques were returned to the complainant by the O.P bank on 12.9.2018 through registered post ,furnishing the reason that the account of the complainant was non-KYC and ,therefore, the cheques were not encashed. Now, the complainant has filed the instant case , praying for passing an order directing the O.P Bank for clearance of cheques and for payment of compensation etc. Hence, the case.
O.P-3 has filed written statement, wherein it is stated by it that the three cheques were handed over to the complainant in compliance of judgment dated 3.8.2018 passed by the Hon’ble SCDRC ,West Bengal in F.A no.A/147/2018. Though the cheques were not encahsed, there is no negligence nor any malafide intention on its part to comply the judgment of the Hon’ble State Commission.
O.P nos. 1 and 2 i.e the bank authority has also filed written statement to contest herein. According to them, cheques presented by the complainant were not cleared as the account of the complainant was not KYC updated. The said account was non-KYC account and, therefore, the cheques were not cleared. The reason of the cheques being not cleared was informed to the complainant when he approached the bank. The complainant was asked to submit a fresh KYC , but he did not. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the Bank and ,therefore, the case should be dismissed in limini with cost.
Upon the averments of the parties the following points are formulated for consideration.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps bank as alleged by the complainant?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief or reliefs as prayed for ?
EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES
Both the parties have led their evidence on affidavit and the same are kept in the record. BNAs filed on behalf of them are also kept in the record after consideration.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Point no.1 & 2 :
Already heard the submissions of Ld. Lawyers appearing for the parties. Perused the petition of complaint, written statement , evidence on record and also the documents placed on record. Considered all these along with the BNAs filed by the parties.
Now to see whether there is any deficiency in service committed on the part of the bank authority i.e O.P nos. 1 and 2 for not encashing the three cheques deposited with them by the complainant. Three cheques were deposited with the O.P Ban k by the complainant on 28.8.2018 and this fact is not disputed by the O.P Bank. It also goes undisputed that those cheques have not been encashed by the O.P Bank even after expiry of 18 days from the date of deposit of the said cheques. The reason behind the cheques being not cleared as given by the O.P bank is that the account of the complainant is not KYC updated. According to the version of the complainant, the bank has adopted an excuse that his account is not KYC updated, to cover up the latches on its part for not clearing the cheques within the time.
Let us see now whether there is any grain of truth in the reason as furnished by the Bank authority for non-clearance of the cheques of the complainant. It is the version of the complainant that KYC form was submitted before the bank by him on 28.10.2013 and a copy of that form has also been placed on record by the complainant which is marked as Annexure 5 to his evidence. The complainant has also placed a circular of Reserve Bank of India namely “Master Direction – Know Your Customer (KYC) Direction, 2016 of Reserve Bank of India” a copy of which is annexed by the complainant with the BNA filed by him. A perusal of the said circular of RBI, reveals that supply of KYC by all account holders is imperative and such KYC is also required to be updated periodically. There are three categories of accounts – High Risk Account, Medium Risk Account and Low Risk Account. High Risk Account is required to be updated once in two years. Medium Risk Account in 8 years and Low Risk Account should be KYC updated once in 10 years. The account of the complainant is a low risk one and it gets substantiated by a document, marked as Annexure 5 to the evidence of the complainant. This annexure 5 is the photocopy of writing displayed on Kiosk i.e “Pass Book Updated machine” of the O.Ps. All these things go undisputed and it stands established therefrom that the account of the complainant is a Low Risk Account. If it is a Low Risk Account, its operation shall remain valid for 10 years since the date of submission of KYC i.e on and from 28.10.2013. The account will remain operative till 28.10.2023 in accordance with the above noted circular of RBI. The cheques were deposited by the complainant on 28.8.2018 when his account was operative with sufficient KYC. The O.P Bank should have encashed the cheques of the complainant, but they have not done so. Instead of clearing the cheques, they have presented a cock and bull story to the effect that the account of the complainant was non-KYC and that the complainant did not furnish the KYC information to them ,whenever asked to do so. The complainant has supplied KYC to his account on 28.10.2013 and that KYC is valid up to the year 2023.
In the circumstances, it appears that the Bank authority has no sufficient reason for withholding the clearance of the cheques of the complainant and asking the complainant to submit fresh KYC. Asking the complainant to submit fresh KYC and withholding clearance of the cheques of the complainant is nothing but a subterfuge to suppress their own latches. The negligence of the O.P Bank appears to be as clear as day light on the face of the materials on record. This negligence is nothing but gross deficiency in service and for this deficiency in service on the part of the O.P Bank, the complainant has suffered a lot of harassment and mental agony. The complainant is, therefore, deemed to be entitled to compensation for deficiency in service on the part of the bank authority.
In the result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
ORDERED
That the complaint case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.Ps with a cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the O.P nos. 1 and 2 only.
O.P-3 is directed to arrange for sufficient amount in his account within 20 days of this order so that the three cheques i.e Cheque no. 010093 of Rs.1320/-, cheque no. 010094 of Rs.8989/- and cheque no. 010095 of Rs.2000/- ,all dated 28.8.2018 issued by it are encashed. Thereafter, the complainant shall deposit the said three cheques with O.P nos. 1 and 2 after expiry of 20 days as aforesaid for credit of the amount to his account maintained with O.P nos. 1 and 2 and the Bank will then take all steps for encashment of the said cheques within 10 days of their deposit.
In case, the O.Ps fail to comply with the direction of the Forum regarding deposit of sufficient amount and encashment of cheques as mentioned above within the scheduled period, the O.P-3 will have to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- and O.P nos. 1 and 2 , Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the complainant with interest @10% p.a till full realization thereof.
The O.P nos. 1 and 2 Bank shall also pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment within a month of this order, failing which, the compensation amount and the cost amount as aforesaid will bear interest @10% p.a till full realization thereof.
Registrar-In-Charge of this Forum is directed to deliver a copy of the judgment free of cost to the parties concerned.
President
I / We agree
Member
Dictated and corrected by me
President
