| Final Order / Judgement | ORDER Dated: 28-04-2017 Manju Bala Sharma, Member - Instant complaint has been filed by complainant on 28-12-2015 stating therein that from the last so many years she is approaching OP to operate the locker no. 198 with bank account no. 1677 which was in the name of her late mother in law (Smt. Lajwanti) survived by her son namely Kishan Lal , husband of the complainant. As Shri Kishan Lal husband of the complainant passed away on 24.11.2013 , the complainant approached OP who has already transferred the amount lying in the account of Sh. Kishan Lal to the account of the complainant to permit her to operate the locker but OP refused for the same. Lastly on 10.11.2015 she approached OP to allow her to open the said locker but the OP refused. Complainant alleged that this act of the OP of not allowing the operation of the locker by the complainant is illegal , improper , unjust and due to this she suffered great mental tension harassment and agony. Aggrieved by these acts of OP the complainant filed this complaint and prayed that OP be directed to allow and assist her in opening and operating the said locker no. 198 and to pay Rs 1,00,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and pain suffered by her with Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.
- Due to non appearance of OP, the matter was proceeded ex-parte against OP on 14.10.2016.
- In support of her complaint complainant filed her own affidavit along with documents i.e. copy of letter dated 14.10.2015 (Ex. CW1/1), copy of death certificate of Smt. Lajwanti (Ex. CW1/2 ) , copy of death certificate of my husband (Ex. CW1/3 ), copy of election I card (Ex. CW1/4 ), copy of passbook of her mother in law (Ex. CW1/5A ), copy of photograph of original keys (Ex. CW-1/6) and copy of application (Ex. CW1/7).
- We have heard the arguments on behalf of complainant and considered the evidence and documents filed by the complainant and written arguments. In this case points to be considered are as under:-
- Whether complainant is a consumer?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP?
- Relief
- In order to prove that complainant is a consumer she has placed on record copy of the statement of account of the OP bank. As OP has not entered appearance and does not rebut the same we have no other option but to accept the contention of the complainant that complainant is a consumer of OP.
- Complainant has placed on record copies of Statement of Account of her husband as well as of herself showing that a sum of Rs. 1,25,026/- was transferred in her account by the OP bank after the demise of her husband. Complainant has also filed affidavit and letter No. RBI/2006-2007/325 dated 17.04.2007 sent to all scheduled commercial banks in respect of extension of Safe Deposit Locker/ Safe Custody Article facility and access to safe deposit lockers/ return of sale custody articles by banks clause 3.3 of which reads as under :
“3.3 Banks should note that since the access given to the survivor(s) / nominee(s), subject to the foregoing conditions, would constitute a full discharge of the bank's liability, insistence on production of legal representation is superfluous and unwarranted and only serves to cause entirely avoidable inconvenience to the survivor(s) / nominee(s) and would, therefore, invite serious supervisory disapproval. In such case, therefore, while giving access to the survivor(s) / nominee(s) of the deceased locker hirer / depositor of the safe custody articles, the banks should desist from insisting on production of succession certificate, letter of administration or probate, etc., or obtain any bond of indemnity or surety from the survivor(s)/nominee(s).” - We have gone through clause 3.3 of the letter and the documents filed by the complainant. Complainant has also filed her affidavit stating on oath that her husband Late Sh. Kishan Lal and she herself had two separate accounts in OP bank and after the demise of her husband the amount of Rs. 1,25,026/- lying in his account was transferred in her account. She has also filed copies of the bank passbooks showing the entry of the transfer of amount from the account of her late husband to her account as Mark “A” and “B” and statement of account of OP bank as Mark “C”. As OP has not entered we do not find anything on record to rebut the statement of the complainant and allegations leveled by the complainant against the OP. We therefore, direct the OP to allow the complainant to operate locker no. 198 and to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation to the complainant for harassment and Rs. 5000/- as litigation cost to the complainant.
8. Copy of the order made available to the parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to record room. Announced on……… | |
