Before the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission [Central], 5th Floor ISBT Building, Kashmere Gate, Delhi
Complaint Case No.-60/14.09.2020
Sheetal Gupta W/o Pankaj Gupta
R/o. 3157, 2nd floor Mohalla Dassan
Cherkhe Walan, Haus Qauzi, Delhi 110006 ...Complainant
Versus
OP1 Union Bank of India, Zonal Officer
[erstwhile Andhra Bank
Zonal Officer]
2nd Floor Aggarwal, Corporate Tower,
Govindlal Sikha Marg Rajender Place
New Delhi, PIN 110008.
OP2 Branch Manager , Union Bank of India
[erstwhile- Branch Manager, Andhra Bank,]
Chandni Chowk
Delhi PIN- 110006. ...Opposite Party
Order Reserved on: 02.02.2023
Date of Order: 31.03.2023
Coram: Shri Inder Jeet Singh, President
Shri Vyas Muni Rai, Member
Ms. Shahina, Member -Female
Inder Jeet Singh
ORDER
1.1 (Introduction to case of parties) : The complainant seeks compensation by alleging allegations against the OPs of deficiency of services, unfair practice and negligence since an amount of Rs.500/- was transferred from her saving bank account, without her permission, to other current account, which amounts to leakage of information in breach of confidentiality. On the other side, the OP had replied to legal notice of complainant by narrating facts that a cheque of Rs.2,75,000/- presented for clearing was dishonored and charges of Rs. 206.50p were debited in her current account. Since there was no sufficient balance in the said current account, an amount of Rs.500/- was debited in her saving bank account and credited into her current account. Then charge were recovered as per banking law and practice in the regular course of banking.
1.2. The complaint is in English, there are many syntax flaw or of complete expressions or proper wordings in complaint, however, care has been taken in this Order to structure the case of complainant as actually it is intended by using appropriate words, expression and syntax.
1.3. The complaint was filed against Andhra Bank, appearance was also caused twice by Shri Vivek Kumar Singh, Advocate for OPs but neither reply was filed by them nor further appearance, thus right to file reply was closed on 6.9.2022 and then they were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 04.11.2022. Moreover, Andhra Bank has been merged into Union Bank of India and reply to legal notice was also by Union Bank of India, therefore, by separate order dated 31.03.2023 name of Union Bank of India is substituted.
1.4. The complainant had filed complaint on 14.09.2020. It was filed u/s 12 of erstwhile repealed law of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, since the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 was already notified w.e.f. 20.07.2020, which was earlier to the filing of complaint. However, without considering the nomenclature, the complaint is being considered under Act of 2019.
2.1 (Case of complainant ) : The complainant is a law abiding citizen of India. She has permanent address mentioned above. OP1 is the Zonal Manager of OP Bank and OP2 is its Branch Manager, where complainant maintains her saving a/c no. 077310100020968 being its esteemed consumer. On 23.07.2020 complainant had received a message, of deducting Rs 500/-, from her account, immediately she reported to Branch Manager, who had asserted that amount was transferred to her other account of proprietor firm M/s Orsus Publishing House but he assured to remove the mistake of his bank official.
2.2. Then on 27.7.2020 complainant applied for statement of her account for period from 01.04.2020 to 27.07.2020 and on receipt thereof, she was shocked and surprised that an amount Rs.500/- was debited on 23.07.2020, which was transferred to her other account but without obtaining her permission. Moreover, what Branch Manager assured on 23.07.2020 had all went in vain. After this incident the complainant scared for security of her account. Immediately she approached to Branch Manager again and narrated him the episode but the Branch Manager instead of feeling pity, asked the complainant that she cannot do anything against the Bank official because they have many Advocate on Bank panel to strongly contest the matter and the complainant may be get punished by Bank in the court.
2.3. Complainant had faced a a lot of hardship and harassment of OPs Bank. There is also negligence, lack of supervision, misconduct, mala-fide. and unfair practice, deficient service apart from to grab the money by OPs. The complainant suffered mentally, physically and huge losses due to breach of highly confidential account statement security by its leakage without authority and permission prior to opening of account or for transferring the amount in other current account from saving bank account. OPs are liable to pay compensation of Rs.9,00,500/- since OP1 is Zonal Officer of OP2 and OP2 is its Branch Manager and the acts done are deficiency of services and unfair practice, lack of supervision, high confidential statement of account leakage in the Branch of OPs.
The complainant's legal notice was delivered to OPs by electronic mode, which is admissible u/s 65 of Evidence Act and there is no tempering in pod. However, on 05.09.2020 complainant received reply to legal notice on letter head of Union Bank of India stating that one cheque in her current account was bounced/dishonored, charge Rs 206.50p were debited in the account. Since there was no sufficient amount in the said account and an amount of Rs.500/- were debited in the Saving Bank Account and credited in current account for recovery of charges. OPs admitted the facts of debit of Rs.500/- from saving account without information to complainant. Whereas, as per account statement of M/s Orsus Publishing House, the complainant had already deposit Rs 1000/- in her current account prior to levying charges Rs 206.50p. That is why, the complaint for compensation Rs. 9,00,500/- with interest.
2.4. The complaint is accompanying with copies of legal notice dated 16.08.2020 with postal ticket of 17.8.2020, its reply dated 26.08.2020 by OP, statement of account from 19.12.2019 to 23.07.2020.
3. The OPs were served with notice on complaint but no reply was filed despite opportunity. Moreover, they were also proceeded ex-parte for want of appearance. However, the complainant has placed on record, OPs' reply to the legal notice, it is appropriate to reproduce the reply dated 26.08.2020, it reads as:-
"Union Bank of India, Chandni Chowk Branch"
No-0773 Misc/49 Date: 26/08/2020
To
Ms Sheetal Gupta
3157, 2'' Floor, Mohalla Dassan Hauz Quazi Chandni Chowk, Delhi- 06
Dear Madam,
Sub: Regarding Legal Notice Dated 16.08.2020 sent by Mr Rajesh Kaushik (Advocate)
on your behalf.
We are in receipt of the above mentioned notice sent by your advocate regarding a transfer of Rs 500/- from your SB A/c No- 077310100020968 to your Current Account No- 077311100002333 in the name of M/s Orsus Publishing House in which you are the Proprietor. On 23/07/2020, there was a cheque of Rs.2,75,000/- presented for clearing which was dishonored and charge of Rs.206.50 was debited in your current A/c. Since there was no sufficient balance in the said account, an amount of Rs. 500/- was debited in your SB account and credited into your current account for recovery of the charge.
You are also requested to maintain minimum balance of Rs 10,000/- to maintain your current account failing which applicable penal interest will be chargeable on quarterly basis.
We therefore request you to understand the Banking Law and Practice in regular course of Banking.
Assuring you of all our best services at all times.
Regards sd/- Ashwini Kumar (Sr. Branch Head)".
4. (Evidence and final hearing) : The complaint filed affidavit to lead ex-pate evidence, which is on the lines of complaint with documents. The complainant also filed written arguments and her counsel Shri Rajesh Kaushik, Advocate also made the oral final submissions.
5.1 (Findings) : The contention are considered, analysed and assessed, including of appraisal of oral narration and documentary records. At the outset, it is undisputed fact that complainant has been maintaining her individual saving bank account with OPs and also her other current account in the name of her Proprietary firm M/s Orsus Publishing House. There is also no dispute of dishonour of cheque pertaining to current account, levy of charges of dishonour of cheque, debit of Rs.500/- saving bank account of complainant as well as immediate credit of that amount of Rs.500/- in the current account of complainant.
Thus, issue/dispute is whether transfer of such amount of Rs.500/- was bad in law or banking practice permit so; determination of this issue will answer the complaint as well as its legal consequences.
5.2 By taking into consideration the stock of such facts, sequences of events, the general banking practice & banking services, norms of banking business, it is held that complainant could not prove her case against OPs for the following reasons:-
(i) when bank account is opened, either saving or current, the applicant give undertaking to follows the norms either of deposits or number of withdrawal, interest component, maintaining minimum balance amount in the account (particularly minimum account balance in current account of average quarterly balance),
(ii) the applicant/account holder also consents for debit of account for recovering services charges as normally applicable to saving or current account or collection & cheque bounced charges or fees or no charges/fee for cheque bounced on technical error etc.,
(iii) the general terms and conditions of account & banking services in respect of cheque is that 'if a cheque is credited to the account is subsequently dis-honoured, the amount thereof will be debited to the Account and the cheque is to be returned to the customer; the Bank will levy applicable service charges/fee. In the event the amount in the Account is not sufficient, the Bank shall be entitled to recover the same from any other account of the Customer, held with the Bank, even interest can be levied at prevailing rate on the such funds used by the customer and for the period used',
(iv) the statement of account filed by the complaint shows that on 22.03.2020 there was credit balance amount of Rs.177.01p in the current account of complainant. Then on 23.07.2020 a cheque of Rs.2,75,000/- deposited and it was credited to her account and total credit balance amount comes to Rs.2,75,177/-. However, it was not cleared in clearing session [because of insufficient amount in account of that cheque] and then on 23.07.2020, debit entry of cheque amount of Rs.2,75,000/- was made in the current account of complainant, consequently credit amount of Rs.177.01 was left in her account, however, services charges for rejected cheque become due. The credit balance of Rs.177.01 was not sufficient to clearing charges, thus immediately on 23.07.2023 the OP Bank made credit entry of Rs.500/- in her current account by taking amount from her other account (SB A/c) of complainant held in the same Bank of OP and entry of Rs.500/-also mentions name of complainant/Sheetal Gupta, thence the credit balance came to Rs.677.01p,
(v) the statement of account also shows that subsequently on the same day on 23.07.2023, the complainant had deposited Rs.1000/- cash, thence balance amount came to Rs.1,677.01p but till then Rs.500/- were already get transferred in her current account,
(vi) on 23.07.2020 itself the clearing reject charge of Rs.206.50p were debited in the current account, it left balance of Rs.1,470.51p,
(viii) the sequence of events mentioned in (iv) to (vi) above, are covered in the banking practice as complied in sub-paragraph (iii) r/w (i) and (ii) above and it cannot be construed act of negligence or unfair practice or deficiency in service since it was intentionally practice by the OPs in its day to day functioning of banking business,
(ix) the complainant was also advised and requested to complainant to maintain minimum balance of Rs.10,000/- in her current account, the same was also within the parameter of banking business and services to the complainant and
(x) since both the accounts of complainant are with OPs, the debit and credit entry in the accounts is inter-se entry, it is not in respect of some other third party account, how there is breach of confidentiality of account or leakage of account, or huge pecuniary losses, it could not be established by the complainant.
5.3. The complaint fails and it is dismissed.
6. Copy of this Order be sent/provided forthwith to the parties free of cost as per rules for necessary compliance.
7. It is appropriate to record that this Commission is facing great difficulty in day to day its functioning for want of regular PA and stenographer, since only one stenographer Gr-III is posted for all work.
8: Announced on this 31st March, 2023 [चैत्र 10 , साका 1945].
[Vyas Muni Rai] [Shahina] [Inder Jeet Singh]
Member Member (Female) President
