Punjab

Sangrur

CC/953/2015

Ranjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Axis Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Shinku Kumar

10 Mar 2016

ORDER

 

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                                     

                            

                                                                   Complaint no. 953                                                                                              

                                                                   Instituted on:  01.09.2015

                                                                     Decided on:    10.03.2016

 

Ranjit Singh son of Bhan Singh resident of village Badrukhan Tehsil and District Sangrur.

…. Complainant.      

 

                                         Versus

 

1.     Axis Bank Limited, SCF No.16,17 &18 Ground floor and Basement, SCF No.19 ground Floor, kaula park, Sangrur through its Branch Manager.

 

2.     Axis Bank Limited Regd. Office" TRISHUL' 3rd Floor Opposite Samartheshwar temple, near new Law Garden, Ellisbridge Ahmedabad. 380006 through its authorized signatory.

             ….Opposite parties.

 

 

 

FOR THE COMPLAINANT:    Shri Mahesh Satija Advocate                          

 

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES  :    Exparte.                     

 

 

 

Quorum

         

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

K.C.Sharma, Member

Sarita Garg, Member

                 

 

 

 

ORDER:  

 

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

 

1.             Ranjit Singh complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that he opened an account bearing number 911010028927154  with OPs on  8.6.2011 under Zero Balance policy and it was settled that  OPs will never deduct  any service tax or consolidated charges. The complainant fulfilled the terms and conditions as stated by the OPs like deposit of Rs.2000/- but despite  that an amount of Rs. 61.80 as  service charges and  Rs.500/-  as consolidation charges were deducted  on 29.12.2012 . Further, the OPs deducted the service tax as well as consolidated charges after every three months without any notice and intimation to the complainant.  As such, the OPs  deducted total Rs. 196.50 as service charges and  Rs.1590/-  as consolidation charges from the account of the complainant which is wrong and illegal. Earlier, the OP no.1 deducted the amount of Rs.765/-  as consolidation charges and Rs.94.55 as service charges from the account of Amandeep Singh who is friend of the complainant. He also filed a complaint  in this respect which was decided in favour of Amandeep Singh on 3.3.2015. The complainant visited the office of the OPs number of times with a request to refund the said amount but all in vain. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:- 

i)      OPs be directed to credit amount  of Rs.196.50 as service charges and Rs.1590/- as consolidation charges alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of deduction,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.50000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment and to pay Rs.40000/- as litigation expenses and counsel fee.

2.             Notices of the complaint were sent to the OPs but despite service none appeared for the OPs and as such, OPs were proceeded exparte on  30.10.2015.

3.             In exparte evidence, the complainant has tendered an affidavit Ex.C-1,  copy of pass book Ex.C-2,  copy of Bank Ombudsman Scheme Ex.C-3,  copy of passbook of Amrik Singh  Ex.C-4 and closed evidence.

4.             The main point of controversy in the present complaint is with regard to the deduction of charges from the Zero Balance account of the complainant. We have gone through the documents placed on record and after perusal of the  exparte evidence we find that though the complainant has alleged  that illegal charges have been deducted from the Zero Balance account of the complainant  but while going through the evidence on record we do not find any document which shows that the complainant was maintaining Zero Balance account with the OPs. Moreover, from the perusal of the document Ex.C-2we find that  the charges are being deducted from the very initial stage since the opening of the account starting from 29.12.2012 but since then the complainant has taken no cognizance with regard to the deducting  of the charges and has never represented with the regard to the deduction of the illegal charges, as so stated by him in the complaint. Further, the complainant has not produced copy of any representation which was given to the OPs with regard to the deduction of the charges.  The complainant has specifically stated in the complaint that  earlier his friend Mr.Amandeep Singh had filed a complaint against the OPs with regard to the similar deductions which was decided in favour of Mr. Amandeep Singh.  Here, it would be better to say that  every case has been decided on its own facts and circumstances. So, in the absence  of any cogent and reliable evidence on record, we do not find that there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as the complainant himself has failed to prove his own version by way of producing any cogent evidence.   

5.             So, in view of the above discussion, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant however with no orders as to costs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.

                Announced.

March 10, 2016.

 

 

 

 

     ( Sarita Garg)        ( K.C.Sharma)     (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                        

     Member                 Member                    President

 

BBS/-