DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.56 of 10-01-2014

Decided on 25-04-2014

Harjinder Singh S/o Harpal Singh R/o Gali No.20, Partap Nagar, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Axis Bank Ltd., Ground Floor, Khasra No.852/1/2/2, Village Jeeda, Tehsil & District Bathinda, through its Branch Manager Ishant Chawla.

2.Axis Bank Limited, Bathinda-Mall Road, Bathinda, through its Branch Manager.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt.Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.

Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member.

Present:-

For the Complainant: Ms.Rajni Garg, counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh.Rajneesh Kumar Rampal, counsel for the opposite parties.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he is running a goldsmith shop at village Jeeda, Tehsil and District Bathinda and is holding an account bearing No.912010057066153 with the opposite party No.1. At the time of opening the abovesaid account, the Branch Manager and other officials assured the complainant that no hidden charges are being imposed by the bank nor any amount has been deducted from the account of the customer on account of any hidden charges including service tax etc. The officials of the bank obtained the signatures of the complainant on various blank printed forms with the assurance to fill the same later on. The terms and conditions of the account opening form have not been read over and explained to the complainant. The complainant has been using the abovesaid account as per his requirement and used to deposit the amount in his account from time to time and also used to withdraw the amount as per his requirement in cash and also through ATM. On 23.11.2013, the complainant visited the branch of the opposite parties at village Jeeda and on getting the passbook of his account updated, he came to know that the opposite parties have debited the amount of Rs.125.051/- on account of service charges on 25.3.2013, Rs.1015.49/- on account of consolidated charges, Rs.16.63/- on account of service tax on 27.4.2013 and Rs.134.51/- on account of consolidated charges on dated 27.4.2013, thereby deducting the total amount of Rs.1292.14/- + 878.86/-=Rs.2171/- from the account of the complainant, although no such amount was payable by him to the bank nor any prior intimation has been given to him before deducting the said amount from his account. The complainant enquired about the said charges from the opposite party No.1 and requested it to credit the abovesaid amount of Rs.2171/- in his account, but to no avail. The opposite parties proclaimed that the outstanding balance of Rs.878.86/- shall also be deducted from the account of the complainant on account of service charges and the complainant would not be allowed to withdraw the said amount. The complainant has got issued a legal notice dated 27.11.2013 to the opposite parties. Hence the present complaint filed by the complainant to seek the directions of this Forum to credit the amount of Rs.2171/- in his account alongwith cost and compensation.

2. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that it is normal in banking practice to impose charges for various reasons like not maintaining sufficient balance (Minimum balance), closing charges etc. and is in vogue in banking field. The opposite party bank in its assessment and commercial decision taking into consideration of the various micro level issues like infrastructure expenses and other costs of the bank devolves such schedule of charges. The opposite party is a commercial bank conducting its business operations in accordance with the guidelines and procedures specified by the Reserve Bank of India from time to time. The Bank has got stringent procedures, formalities and guidelines to perform its duties on day-to-day basis and has to comply with all procedures and formalities before transacting any business. The opposite parties have referred the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled Archana M Kamath Vs. Canara Bank and another, 2003 (1) CPR 296/2003(2) CLT (SC) 267. The opposite parties admitted the account of the complainant bearing No.912010057066153 with Axis Bank Limited at village Jeeda. The opposite parties denied that the signatures of the complainant have been obtained on any blank printed forms and terms and conditions of the account opening form have not been explained to him. The complainant has voluntarily signed the account opening form after carefully hearing, understanding and admitting the contents thereof. While opening the account, it is the normal practice of the bank to give such charges details to the customers, the schedule of the charges list has been given to the complainant in a welcome kit containing cheque book, debit card, debit card usage guide, schedule of charges list. As per the policy adopted by the bank, whenever there is a revision, the same will be intimated in advance to the customer apart from placing in the branch's noticeboard and bank's website as such the averments of the complainant are false and vague in nature. The charges levied to the account of the complainant was on account of non-maintaining of the minimum AQB (Average Quarterly Balance), which is Rs.2247.20/- (Including service tax) for the quarter period from 15.12.2012 to 15.9.2013. In addition to this, as per the Schedule of Charges, transaction charges of Rs.449.44/- (Including service tax) for 4 transactions are also levied in the account of the complainant. As the complainant has failed to maintain the average quarterly balance in his account, the transaction charges are also applicable for the transactions done by him through the debit card and cheques. The transactions charges comes into effect when the required AQB is not maintained. Exceeding the free limit, each transaction will cost the complainant to the tune of Rs.100/-. The opposite parties denied that the officials of the bank proclaimed that a sum of Rs.878.86/- lying deposited in the account of the complainant will not be released in his favour.

3. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

4. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

5. The submission of the complainant is that he is holding an account bearing No.912010057066153 with the opposite party No.1. At the time of opening the abovesaid account, the Branch Manager and other officials assured the complainant that no hidden charges be imposed by the bank nor any amount has been deducted from his account on account of any hidden charges including service tax etc. The officials of the bank obtained the signatures of the complainant on various blank printed forms with the assurance to fill the same later on. The terms and conditions of the account opening form have not been read over and explained to the complainant. On 23.11.2013, the complainant visited the branch of the opposite parties at village Jeeda and on getting the passbook of his account updated, he came to know that the opposite parties have debited the amount of Rs.125.051/- on account of service charges on 25.3.2013, Rs.1015.49/- on account of consolidated charges, Rs.16.63/- on account of service tax on 27.4.2013 and Rs.134.51/- on account of consolidated charges on dated 27.4.2013, thereby deducting the total amount of Rs.1292.14/- + 878.86/-=Rs.2171/- from the account of the complainant, although no such amount was payable by him to the bank nor any prior intimation has been given to him before deducting the said amount from his account. The complainant enquired about the said charges from the opposite party No.1 and requested it to credit the abovesaid amount of Rs.2171/- in his account, but to no avail. The opposite parties proclaimed that the outstanding balance of Rs.878.86/- shall also be deducted from the account of the complainant on account of service charges and the complainant would not be allowed to withdraw the said amount. The complainant has got issued a legal notice dated 27.11.2013 to the opposite parties.

6. On the other hand the submission of the opposite parties is that the complainant has not maintained the minimum AQB (Average Quarterly Balance). The charges levied to the account of the complainant was on account of non-maintaining of the minimum AQB, which is Rs.2247.20/- (Including service tax) for the quarter period from 15.12.2012 to 15.9.2013. In addition to this, as per the Schedule of Charges, transaction charges of Rs.449.44/- (Including service tax) for 4 transactions are also levied in the account of the complainant. As the complainant has failed to maintain the average quarterly balance in his account, the transaction charges were also applicable for the transactions done by him through the debit card and cheques. The transactions charges comes into effect when the required AQB is not maintained. Exceeding the free limit, each transaction will cost the complainant to the tune of Rs.100/-. The opposite parties denied that the officials of the bank proclaimed that a sum of Rs.878.86/- lying deposited in the account of the complainant will not be released in his favour.

7. Ex.C6, contains the charges that has been charged from the complainant on various accounts i.e. Service Tax and Consolidated Charges etc. A perusal of Account Opening Form, Ex.OP1/2, shows that the complainant has opted for Rs.10,000/- as AQB (Average Quarterly Balance) and signed this document and declaration to the effect that he is agreed to maintain the minimum balance. A perusal of Page No.5 of Terms & Conditions Service Charges & Fees, Ex.OP1/5, shows that 'Average Quarterly Balance (AQB) Requirement (SBPRM):-Metro/Urban Centre, Rs.25,000/-; Semi-Urban/Rural Centres, Rs.10,000/-. A further perusal of Ex.OP1/5 shows that 'Charges for Non-Maintenance of AQB:-Metro/Urban Centre, Rs.750/- per quarter (If AQB is between Rs.10,000/- - Rs.25,000/-) and Rs.1000/- per quarter (If AQB is less than Rs.10,000/-); Semi-Urban/Rural Centres, Rs.500/- per quarter (If AQB is between Rs.5000/- - Rs.10,000/-) and Rs.750/- per quarter (If AQB is less than Rs.5000/-). As per the above mentioned charges the complainant has to maintain Rs.10,000/- as AQB. A perusal of record placed on file shows that the complainant has failed to maintain the Average Quarterly Balance of Rs.10,000/- in his account, hence the charges levied on his account, as such the amount of Rs.2247.20/- (Including service tax) for the quarter period from 15.12.2012 to 15.9.2013 was levied on the account of the complainant for non-maintaining the minimum AQB (Average Quarterly Balance). As per the Schedule of Charges, transaction charges of Rs.449.44/- (Including service tax) for 4 transactions are also levied in the account of the complainant. A perusal of Account Statement, Ex.OP1/3, shows that on 12.2.2013, the balance in the account of the complainant was Rs.1141/- and on 25.3.2013, the Service Tax was charged as Rs.125.51/- and Consolidated Charges was charged as Rs.1015.49/-. Similarly, on 30,4.2013, the balance in the account of the complainant was Rs.878.86/- and on 22.6.2013, the Service Tax was charged as Rs.61.80/- and Consolidated Charges was charged as Rs.500/- and on 28.9.2013, the Service Tax was charged as Rs.43.90/- and Consolidated Charges was charged as Rs.355.16/- and so on. Thus a perusal of Ex.OP1/3 shows that the opposite parties have charged the amount of Rs.2171/- from the complainant on account of non-maintaining the AQB i.e. Average Quarterly Balance in his account.

8. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file we are of the considered opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint is dismissed without any order as to cost.

9. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

25-04-2014

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member

(Jarnail Singh)

Member