Haryana

Karnal

CC/55/2020

Kamla Devi Lather - Complainant(s)

Versus

Axis Bank Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Manish Lather

04 Jul 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                         Complaint No.55 of 2020

                                                          Date of instt.22.01.2020

                                                          Date of Decision 04.07.2023

 

Kamla Devi Lather aged 68 years wife of late Shri Rajpal Singh Lather, resident of house no.1, sector-36, Ansal Town, Karnal.

 

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     Axis Bank Ltd., Shakti Colony, Mall Road, Karnal through its Branch Manager.

 

2.     Kuldeep Singh, concerned clerk, Axis Bank Ltd. SCF no.94, Sector-6, Karnal.

 

3.     Axis Bank Ltd. Trishul, opp. Samartheswar Temple, near Law Garden, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 through its Senior Manager.

 

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri Munish Lather, counsel for complainant.

                    Shri Deepak Saini, counsel for the OPs.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant and her husband Shri Rajpal Singh obtained a cash limit of Rs.5,00,000/- under Agriculture Cash Credit Scheme from the OP no.1, vide customer no.8371299910 in the month of January 2011, vide limit account no.911030001409031 and saving account no.910010048943377 and the complainant and her husband were depositing the amount of Rs.30,000/- as interest in time in the month of May and November of every year. The husband of complainant passed away on 27.12.2018. On 01.05.2019, OP no.1 without the consent and knowledge of the complainant deducted an amount of Rs.33,054/- as interest from the account of the complainant instead of Rs.30,000/- which was being deposited by the complainant and her husband from the very beginning. When complainant came to know about the same, she approached the OPs no.1 and 2 and enquired about the same. They told the complainant that due to mistake, an amount of Rs.3054/- has been deducted in excess as interest and next time, in the month of November, 2019, an interest of Rs.26,946/- as interest instead of Rs.30,000/- will be charged by the OPs. Believing the version of the OPs no.1 and 2, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- on 06.05.2019, Rs.3000/- on 09.05.2019 and Rs.100/- on 28.06.2019 with the OPs. Thereafter, on 12.07.2019, OPs deducted an amount of Rs.4045/- on account of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna without the knowledge and consent of the complainant whereas the fact is that the complainant had informed the OPs by way of submitting a form that she does not want to get her crop insured. After that on 01.11.2019, OPs no.1 and 2 without the knowledge and consent of the complainant again deduced an amount of Rs.33,040/- from the account of the complainant as interest instead of Rs.26,946/- as assured by the OPs. Not only this, the OPs also renewed the cash limit of complainant without the consent and knowledge of the complainant. When the complainant came to know about the abovesaid facts, she approached the OPs no.1 and 2 to enquire about the matter and OP no.1 assured the complainant that the excess amount charged from the complainant would be refunded to her and in this regard, complainant moved an application dated 15.11.2019 for the refund of the extra charges deducted by the OPs and said application was entertained and received by the OP no.1 on 19.11.2019 with the sole intention to harass and humiliate the complainant unnecessarily. The complainant had already informed the OPs that she wanted to get closed the abovesaid limit and saving account but inspite of that, OPs renewed the said limit of the complainant and charged extra amount from her. OPs asked the complainant to clear and pay all the abovesaid amount including extra amount otherwise, the complainant will have to deposit the extra amount as interest and they further allured the complainant that lateron, they will refund the extra amount to the complainant and believing their version, the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.5,53,395/- on 18.11.2019, but till today, the extra amount has not been refunded by the OPs to the complainant. The OPs charged excess amount of Rs.23,395/- from the complainant detailed as under:-

Account Service Charges                    Rs. 3064/-

Renewal Processing Fees                    Rs. 5000/-

Lien Charges                                     Rs. 7763.12

Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna         Rs.4 4045.60

Misc. Charges                                    Rs.3523.00

Complainant requested the OPs so many times to refund the abovesaid excess amount, but OPs refused to refund the same. In this there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; cause of action; mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the interest on the CC limit was Rs.30000/-. In fact, as per the calculation, the interest amount occurred Rs.33054/- and as such no extract amount of Rs.3054/- was charged from the husband of complainant. It is also wrong to say that in the month of November, 2019, the interest was Rs.26946/-, in fact Rs.30,000/- were charged on the basis of prevailing rate of interest. As such no excess amount was charged from the complainant. It is further pleaded that the insurance amount of Rs.4045/- was deducted towards the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna as it was mandatory conditions as per the guidelines of Government of India. As such, the amount of Rs.4045/- was legally charged from the complainant. It is wrong to say that the interest on CC limit was Rs.26946/-. In fact, as per the calculation, the interest amount occurred Rs.33040/- and as such no excess amount was charged from the husband of complainant. It is specifically denied that OPs have charged extra amount of Rs.23395.64. As per policy, the CC limit was renewed automatically and the same was renewed in the year 2018 and interest was charged as per the schedule. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of application to Axis Bank Ex.C1, copy of bank receipt Ex.C2, copy of bank statement Ex.C3, copy of death certificate of Rajpal Singh Ex.C4, copy of message details received from Bank Ex.C5 to Ex.C7 and closed the evidence on 01.09.2021 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Arun Goyal Ex.OP1/A, copy of bank statement Ex.OP1 and closed the evidence on 16.11.2022 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant and her husband obtained a cash limit of Rs.5,00,000/- under Agriculture Cash Credit Scheme from the OP no.1. The complainant and her husband were depositing the amount of Rs.30,000/- as interest in time in the month of May and November of every year. The husband of complainant passed away on 27.12.2018. On 01.05.2019, OP no.1 without the consent and knowledge of the complainant deducted an amount of Rs.33,054/- as interest from the account of the complainant instead of Rs.30,000/-. On 12.07.2019, OPs deducted an amount of Rs.4045/- on account of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna without the knowledge and consent of the complainant whereas complainant had informed the OPs by way of submitting a form that she does not want to get her crop insured. OPs also renewed the cash limit of complainant without the consent and knowledge of the complainant. Complainant approached the OPs to enquire about the matter and OP no.1 assured the complainant that the excess amount charged from the complainant would be refunded to her and in this regard, complainant moved an application dated 15.11.2019 for the refund of the extra charges but OPs have not refunded the same and harass the complainant on one pretext or the other and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that the interest on the CC limit was not Rs.30000/- as alleged by the complainant but as per the calculation, the interest amount occurred Rs.33054/- and as such no extra amount of Rs.3054/- was charged. The insurance amount of Rs.4045/- was deducted towards the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna as it was mandatory conditions as per the guidelines of Government of India. As per policy, the CC limit was renewed automatically and the same was renewed in the year 2018 and interest was charged as per the schedule and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, complainant and her husband had obtained the cash limit of Rs.5,00,000/- under agriculture cash credit scheme from the OPs in the year of 2011. It is also admitted that the husband of the complainant was expired on 27.12.2018. It is also admitted that crop of the complainant and her husband were insured under the said scheme.

11.           As per the version of the complainant, OPs have charged extra interest on the said cash limit and also had insured their crops without their consent. The onus to prove her version was relied upon the complainant but complainant has miserably failed to prove the same by leading any cogent and convincing evidence. In para no.5 of the complainant, it has been specifically mentioned that on 12.07.2019, OPs deducted an amount of Rs.4045/- on account of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna without the knowledge and consent of the complainant and complainant had informed the OPs by way of submitting a form that she does not want to get her crop insured. But complainant has failed to place on file alleged form whereby she has informed the OPs not to insured her crop. The CC limit and saving account of the complainant has been closed by the OPs on the written application Ex.C1 and complainant has cleared all the outstanding dues. The crop of the complainant and her husband had been insured under Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna as it was mandatory condition as per guidelines of Government of India.

12.           Thus, in view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of any merits and deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:04.07.2023

                                                                President,

                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                   Redressal Commission, Karnal.

       

(Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

         Member                         Member