Presents:-
- Sri P.Samantara,President.
- Sri G.K.Rath, Member.
Dated, Bolangir the 9th day of September 2015.
C.C.No.81 of 2014.
Kumari Puja Rani Bojja, age-13 years daughter of Srinibas Rao.
Minor, represented through mother guardian B.Baby Sumalat,wife of
Srinibas Rao, age-33 years, Resident of Officer’s Colony,Bolangir
Town, P.O/P.S & Dist- Bolangir.
.. ., Complainant.
-Versus-
Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Bolangir Branch
At-Tikrapada,Bolangir Town, P.O/P.S/Dist- Bolangir.
.. .. Opp.Party.
Adv. For the complainant- Sri B.S.Satpathy & M.Beriha.
Adv. For the Opp.Party -M/S.A.K.Sahoo & Associates.
Date of filing of the case – 24.11.2014
Date of order - 09.09.2015
JUDGMENT.
Sri P.Samantara,President.
In the matter of an application u/s.12 of the C.P.Act,1986 filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service against the opposite party.
2. The complainant retained a recurring deposit account No.052501504207 in deposit of Rs 2,000/- per month for a period of 15 months. And also stated the mother of the complainant B.Baby Sumalata retained a SB account No.052525000448.
3. The complainant also averred, it is permitted the R.D. account monthly installment can be transferred from the account of B.Baby Sumalata, besides depositing in the said account personally. The transfer continues since dt.12.08.2013.
4. It is stated on the month of September 2013, there has been a transfer of Rs 2,000/- from B.Baby Sumalata account, so also a personal deposit ensured, which is not yet accounted.
5. Further the complainant averred, in completion 15 months period the accumulation in R.D. account should have come to Rs 30,000/- plus interest and Rs 2,000/- extra deposit entailing Rs 32,000/- plus interest @ 9% accrued thereon but it is pitiably Rs 29,581/- in the account, which is erroneous, malafide and arbitrary. In addition to above stated facts, it is submitted the O.P bank has unduly penalized Rs 112.36 in 12 times amounting to Rs 1,348.32 along with SMS charges without sending any SMS. Praying to return the unaccounted deposited money along with interest and waiving the imposed penalty and SMS charges. Relied on statement slip, Deposit voucher, transaction enquiry and affidavit.
6. In pursuant to notice, the O.P appeared and filed the version on dated 06.01.2015 admitting the complainant is a minor daughter of B.Baby Sumalata and Srinibas Rao and the complainant opened a recurring deposit account vide A/C No.0525250000448 on dt.12.08.2013 for depositing Rs 2,000/- per month for a period of 15 months and Account No.0525015043207 retained in the name of B.Baby Sumalata.
7. The O.P also contended, it is incorrect to say there has been transfer of monthly installment amount from the account of B.Baby Sumalat. There has been cash deposit of the said Rs 2,000/- in complainant’s RD Account and submitted there has been only transfer of Rs 2,000/- from account of B.Baby Sumalata to the R.D. account in the month of September 2013.There was no cash deposit in the month of September 2013.
8. Further submitted, the complainant deposited Rs 2,000/- on dated 18.09.2014 in the SB account No.052501504207 and same has been entered in the account, the account statement speaks so. The R.D. installment of Rs 2,000/- for the month of September 2013 was debited from the SB Account No. 052501504207 as per the auto debit standing instruction and same was credited to the RD account-052525000448 on dated 12.09,2013 .The counter foil of the deposit slip available with complainant is of dt.18.09.2014 and not relating to the date 18.09.2013.
9. The O.P also added as per the auto debit standing instruction, the RD installment execution happen between 12 to 20 every month subject to availability of sufficient balance but in the month of November 2013 as there was no sufficient balance in the SB Account No.052501504207 till 22nd November 2013 hence RD installment executed for the month of November 2013 although complainant has deposited Rs 3,000/- on dated 22.11.2013,in SB Account No.052501504207 which short fall in RD Account, which is a missed installment being available with only 14 installment in stead of 15 installment to be accounted for.
10. The other submission was that the monthly average balance to be maintained in case of Young Star Account is Rs 2,500/- .Non maintenance of MAB leads to penalty Rs 100 +12.36% service tax. The charge as levied is as per TRAI and RBI guidelines.
11. Prayed, the O.P has not committed any negligence in terms of customer service so the case may be dismissed with cost as the nature of the complaint is vague and vexatious.
12. Heard the complainant and submission made by the learned counsel. Perused the records and documents filed by the both the parties and arguments at length.
13. The dispute arises in relation to two numbers of accounts but we are in perplexed 3 numbers of accounts continues to play the scene.
14. The advancement of the O.P is that as per the contract and guidelines, in opening one recurring Deposit Accounts, it requires an opening of SB account therewith. So in the present case, opening of Recurring deposit account No.052525000448 entails one concurrent SB Account No.052501504207 opening named Young Star Account that requires maintenance of the monthly average balance amounting to Rs 2,500/- which is not maintained hitherto. Similarly the complainant has to deposit the transferable required sum in the Young Star Account only not in the mother-B.Baby Sumalata’s Account.
15. It is also transpired, the account of the mother is no way connected to the account of Pujarani Bojja nor also the recurring deposit account. Hence depositing on the account of B.Baby Sumalata is misconceived one, so also set-asiding the Young Star Account, one can’t deposit exclusively at the recurring deposit account is also a violation contract, RBI guidelines and rules of opening an recurring deposit account thereto savings bank account. So it is vehemently advanced the case is misconceivedly filed in ignorance of the contract that is entered with. No fault found with the O.P on such concern.
16. Consideration of the foresaid analysis percolates rules relating to opening of an recurring deposit account and savings bank account is in consistent and does not contributes any latches commissioning of fault, thereby deficiency of service.
17. In controverting the above noted advancement, by the O.P, we observe, the O.P has rashnessly charged the monthly average balance penalty @ Rs 100/- + service tax amounting to Rs 1348.32 paise in deviation of RBI guidelines and Damodar Committee report in exclusive violation on the specific context and issue.
18. On MAB (Minimum average balance) level maintenance we bring to notice, the recommendations of Damodar Committee on customer service in banks which, inter-alia recommended that, banks should inform the customer immediately on the balance in the account breaching minimum balance and the applicable penal charges for not maintaining the balance by SMS/E-mail/letter. Further the penal charges levied should be in proportion to the shortfall observed.
(ii)In case the minimum balance is not restored within a reasonable period, which shall not be less than one month from the date of notice of shortfall, penal charges may be recovered under intimation to the account holder.
(iii)The penal charges should be directly proportionate to the extent of shortfall observed. In other words, the charges should be a fixed percentage levied on the amount of difference between the actual balance maintained and the minimum balance as agreed upon at the time of opening of account. A suitable slab structure for recovery of charges may be finalized.
(iv)It should be ensured that such penal charges are reasonable and not out of line with the average cost of providing services.
(v)It should be ensured that the balance in the savings account does not turn into negative balance solely on account of levy of charges for non maintenance of minimum balance.
19. On consideration it is ample evidential and substantive, the charges levied in principle is violative, arbitrary improper and unjust. So same requires to be completely waived and also in absence of any documentary evidence on the subject. The nature of complaint being vague and vexatious as argued is also misconceived and grossly erroneous one
20. The O.P also does not submit any record on the footsteps of “Khayal Aapka” guidelines and customer service as advanced with.. Again on the deposit and consequential dispute is raised on Rs 2,000/- in the month of September, in the para-5, of the pleadings of O.P, it is admitted- “This is incorrect to say that there has been transfer of monthly installment amount from the account of B.Baby Sumalata and there has been cash deposit of the said Rs 2,000/- in complainant’s RD Account. The answering O.P submits that there has been only transfer of Rs 2,000/- from account of B.Baby Sumalata to the RD Account in the month of September 2013.There was no cash deposited in the month of September 2013.”
21. Above noted admission speaks two fold approach on the side of the O.P- it is incorrect no transfer has been effected in installment from the account of B.Baby Sumalata. On the same Para, the middle line speaks it is submitted, there has been only transfer of Rs 2,000/- from B.Baby Sumalata to R.D. Account, which is not as per the contract and also not authorized one by the guardian. So it is substantive Rs 2,000/- has been dislocated or not come to the transaction text unaccounted which to be credited instantly without any demur. In absorption of same, the Recurring Deposit account comes to the complete balance of 15 numbers installment, i.e Rs 30,000/- plus accruing @ 9% interest as per contract justification.
22. Besides the above issues no other point was urged.
23. For the reasons stated above and taking over all view of the case, we are of opinion that the case is in line of merit. Thus same is allowed.
Hence ordered;-
ORDER.
The case is allowed on contest. The O.P is hereby directed to disburse the complete installment paid under recurring deposit account along with contracted rate of interest as on the maturity.
The O.P is hereby further directed to waive off the MBA charges as levied, along with SMS charges levied.
In addition, the O.P is to carry out the order within 30 days of this order, failing which @ 9% interest P.A. will accrue on the entire sum since date of application till realization and also pay a compensation of Rs 3,000/-(Rupees three thousand) only, inclusive other legal expenses for the loss, harassment & mental agony sustained, within the same time frame.
ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN FORUM THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015.
I agree.
(G.K.Rath) (P.Samantara)
MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
