SRI JIBAN BALLAV DAS,PRESIDENT:-
The Complainant’s case in brief is that the complainant purchased Fixed deposit bearing No.55510035544 dtd.01.08.2001 for Rs.11,000/- from ICICI Bank Ltd. who is the Opp.Parties No.1,2, & 4 with interest @ 10.75 per cent with maturity date on dstd.01.08.2006 with matured value of Rs.18,327.84. On the date of maturity the complainant submitted the original receipt with signature on the backside of the Fixed Deposit by Registered post but the maturity value was not deposited in the account of the Petitioner vide S/B Account No.459 of UBI,Balia Branch. Thereafter, the complainant made several correspondences with the Opp.Parties but to no result. Thereafter the complainant contacted the OP No.4 who asked the complainant to submit the letter from the depositor mentioning the mailing address, phone no. etc. duly verified and attested by the Branch Manager, cancelled chaque of first Deposit, self attested copy of PAN Card, self attested copy of Addhar card. The complainant submitted the above documents with the OP No.4 by registered post with AD on dtd.19.04.2017. Even then no action was taken by the Ops, though the Fixed Deposit was matured on dtd.01.08.2006 the complainant was deprived of getting his money and the complainant sustained deficiency in service for which the complainant filed this case against the Opp.Parties for release of his matured value amounting to Rs.18,327.84 and the complainant also claimed compensation of Rs.15,000/- for the loss sustained by him due to the inaction of the Opp.Parties. Hence, the proceeding filed by the complainant which is supported by verification.
2. On the otherhand, the OP No.1,2, & 4 filed written version stating therein that the admitted fact was that the complainant got a Fixed Deposit certificate from the Opp.Party-Bank for a term of five years on dtd.01.08.2001 which was due for maturity on dtd.01.08.2006 with maturity value of Rs.18,327.84.The contention of the OP-Bank are that the maturity amount was sent to the complainant but the same was not received by the complainant. According to the Ops since it is a contract between the complainant and the OP-Bank and the terms and conditions are binding on both the parties. According to the Ops the term of Fixed Deposit will expire with maturity and no interest will accrued thereafter on such deposit unless requested for renewal by the depositor. Therefore, since there was no request for renewal of the Term deposit the complainant is not entitled to get any interest on the amount after the maturity date. It is further contended that the complainant has not received two cheques sent by the Ops by Under Certificate of Posting. Under such premises the OP-Bank on dtd.28.05.2007 intimated the complainant in writing for giving Indemnity-cum-Undertaking bond to the OPp.Party for issuance of duplicate cheques. The Indemnity Bond was also supplied to the complainant but the complainant slept over the matter and took no action. Instead of that the complainant filed this case against the Opp.Parties on frivolous ground. Therefore, according to the complainant the Petitioner has not filed this case with clean hand. Two years delay have not been explained by the complainant. Lastly, it is submitted by the OP-Bank that the OP-Bank is always ready and willing to serve the customer and the OP-Bank is ready to release the maturity value after receipt of attested copies of KYC and other documents from the complainant.
3. Learned Counsel for the OP No.3 also filed written version to the dispute and challenged the maintainability of the complaint filed by the complainant and argued in his support. It is also submitted by the OP No.3 that New India Assurance Co.(OP No.3) is no way connected with the Fixed deposit amount of the complainant. Learned Counsel for the OP No.3 also states that the complaint petition is otherwise illegal, arbitrary and not maintainable and prays for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.
4. On the above pleadings of the parties, the following issues are framed:-
i) whether the complainant is a consumer for which the complainant is entitled to any relief sought ?
5. Heard both the parties at length in the matter. There is no dispute that the complainant purchased Fixed Deposit worth Rs.11,000/- on dtd.01.08.2001 having its maturity date on dtd.01.08.2006 with matured value of Rs.18,327.84. According to the complainant, on dtd.14.08.2006 the complainant submitted the Fixed Deposit by him through registered post but the Opp.Parties intimated the complainant for sending the cancelled cheques,self -attested Pan card, self -attested Addhar card which was also complied by the complainant as per his letter dtd.19.04.2017 which was sent by the registered with AD. when no action was taken by the Opp.Parties, the complainant submitted a letter to the OP-Bank on dtd.01.07.19 for release of his matured value.
The admitted fact is that as per Clause-14 of the terms and conditions of the Fixed deposit the complainant is not entitled to any interest after the maturity date. The pleas of the OP-Bank is that the interest amount of Rs.7,327.84 drawn on Vijaya Bank was dispatched to the complainant’ address opn dtd.30.06.2006 which was returned back to the OP-Bank but the OP-Bank is unable to trace out the India post receipt due to lapse of time.
6. This plea of the OP-Bank are not sustainable as the OP-Bank is a service provider and the complainant, after reposing trust on the OP-Bank kept his money with the OP-Bank. So not getting the UCP receipt is not a valid plea of the OP-Bank which appears that the OP-Bank was negligent and this amounts to improper service by the OP-Bank. In either case the plea of the OP-Bank that UCP through India post dtd.01.09.2006 having not returned to the OP-Bank nor any receipt of sending the amount having not traceable by the OP-Bank as admitted by the OP-Bank amounts to gross negligence and complete absence of service to its customer. So, further demand of KYV etc. from the complainant is an additional burden which is due to lapses of the Bank Authority. So, the stand taken by the OP-Bank in the written version vide page-22 is of no benefit to the Ops. The cheques issued by the OP-Bank have not been encased is an admitted fact. So, further demand by the OP-Bank of execution of Indemnity Bond etc. appears to a burden on the complainant for the lapses of the Bank Authority as revealed from their own admission. Since, the complainant has already supplied the documents earlier, there is no room for doubt for release of the matured value of the Fixed deposit amount. Further more, the Bank Authority, instead of depositing the amount in the account of the complainant there was no occasion to send cheques with regard to maturity value of the Fixed deposit. So this is gross deficiency of service on the part of the OP-Bank.
7. Thus, according to the complainant this is a clear case of negligence by the OP-Banker who dealt with the complainant in an improper manner. There was no justification for correspondence and issuance of cheques to the complainant when the complainant has already submitted Bank account in the UBI and after the maturity it was a bounden duty of the OP-Bank to deposit the maturity amount in the bank account of the complainant.
8. Thus, in our considered opinion a simple matter has been made complicated due to action of the OP-Bank for which the complainant was deprived of getting prompt service from the service provider. Therefore, both the two issues are answered in support of the complainant. Hence, it is ordered:-
The matter is disposed of on contest between the parties. The OPP.Parties-Bank are hereby directed that the complainant be given his matured value of Rs.11,000/- with interest till the date of payment. The OPP.Parties-Bank are directed to deposit the maturity value of Rs.11,000/- from 01.08.2001 till the date of payment in the S/B Account No.459 of UBI Balia Branch with cost of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation and unnecessary harassment to the complainant. The Ops-Bank shall carry out the above order within a period of one month from the date of order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to take action as per Law.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 29th day of January,2020.
