Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/17/89

Giribala Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Assistant Commissioner, EPFO - Opp.Party(s)

Pushpanjali Kumari

03 Feb 2023

ORDER

                District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro

Date of Filing-02-06-2017

Date of final hearing-03-02-2023

 Date of Order-03-02-2023

Case No. 89/2017

Giribala Devi died during pendency of the case

Hence Om Prakash Mishra S/o Late Jageshwar Mishra

Resident of Qr.No- 2-471, Sector-2/B, Bokaro Steel City, District- Bokaro

Vs.

Branch Mangaer, Union Bank of India,

Jainamore Branch, District Bokaro

Present:-

                             Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

                  Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

 

PER- J.P.N Pandey, President

-Judgment-

1. This case was filed by Giribala Devi on 02.06.2017 later on she died on 01.10.2018 hence her son Om Prakash Mishra has been substituted on her place to continue the proceeding as per order dt. 16.03.2019. Case was filed with prayer to direct the O.Ps. to pay Rs. 94,200/-illegally recovered amount of family pension to the complainant.
2. Case of the complainant in brief is that her husband late Jageshwar Mishra was an employee of Bokaro Steel Plant (BSL) who was getting family pension @ Rs. 1256/- per month after his retirement till his death on 18.11.2009. Further case is that in the month of January 2012 Rs. 31,902/- was deducted as excess pension paid and later on Rs. 62,298/- was also recovered in the name of excess pension payment made earlier but said action was not justified. Since the month of March 2012 the payment of pension of the complainant has been stopped by the O.P hence legal notice dt. 10.02.2017 was served thereafter, this case has been filed with above mentioned prayer.
3. O.P. Bank appeared and denied the allegations by filing W.S. in which it is mentioned that as per statement annexed with the complaint petition itself the complainant has received pension @ Rs. 628/- per month from Jan. 2012 to 02.09.2014 and @ of Rs. 1000/- per month from 08.10.2014 to 01.05.2017 and said pension is subject of Employees Provident Fund Organization Association General Office, Ranchi and any bank is only source of reach pension from pension department to pension holder. Further reply is that Rs. 62,298/- was credited on 13.05.2015 in the account of the complainant and on same day she withdrawn Rs. 37,500/- as it is apparent from the copy of statement. Further reply is that husband of the complainant died on 18.11.2009 and as per banking rules and regulations of the bank in the joint account if any member of joint account died hence remaining member has to inform the bank and thereafter joint account required to be closed and balance of said account could not withdraw before the proceeding of the bank but here in this case complainant has proceeded with account and she has withdrawn huge amount from 13.02.2010 to 26.11.2010 in this way she has cheated the bank and liable to be prosecuted. In this way it is replied that all the transactions are as per norms and direction of the EPF office hence case is liable to be dismissed.
4. Now, we have to decide whether complainant is entitled to get relief as claimed or not?
5. It is admitted fact that husband of the complainant was BSL employee and he was getting pension @ Rs. 1256/- per month who died on 18.11.2009. As per Banking norms as well as the general law it was duty of the original complainant Giribala Devi to intimate the Bank as well as concerned authority regarding death of her husband on 18.11.2009. As per statement of the complainant information regarding death of husband of the original complainant has given information to the bank about death of her husband in the year 2011. The photo copy of the account statement of the complainant in which pension was being received shows that after death of the husband of the complainant she has not intimated the Bank or concerned authority rather payment of the pension @ Rs. 1256/- was being  made in the account for a long period. Further the copy of account statement  shows that on 13.05.2015 Rs. 62,298/- was credited  by the O.P. in the account but on same day complainant has withdrawn Rs. 37,500/- and 31,909/- in this way on this fact account statement itself is contradicting the fact mentioned in the complaint petition. As per complainant pension is not being paid to the complainant but it is being contradicted by her account statement (Annexure-A) which shows that till 01.05.2017 pension has been regularly paid to the complainant. During evidence complainant has admitted the fact at para 20 that his father died on 18.11.2009 and its information to the Bank was given in the year 2011, thereafter also there was withdrawal of Rs. 2,04,000/- . At para 21 of the evidence he admits that his mother withdrawn  Rs. 37,500/- on 13.05.2015 and on question by the Forum he has replied that on 16.03.2012 bank has illegally withdrawn Rs. 62,298/- to which bank has deposited later on 13.09.2015. In this way it is very much clear that complainant has not proved its case for grant of relief rather there is no deficiency by the O.P. Accordingly this point is being decided against the complainant and case is being dismissed with cost.

 

(J.P.N. Pandey)

                                                                                      President

                                                                                               

 

                                                                               (Baby Kumari)

                                                                                       Member