This is a complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the prayer for an order directing the O.P./ Bank to refund Rs.16,140/-, which was arbitrarily deducted from the value of TDR amount as penalty and to pay compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- for mental harassment and for other reliefs.

The complaint case in short is that the complainant is the resident of Debinagar, Raiganj having a savings bank account in the O.P.’s bank being No.40110100000110. He deposited money in TDR/ 2011 – K MIP Scheme 1) on 18.02.2013 for 3 years 16 days for the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-; 2) on 22.03.2013 for 3 years 15 days for the amount of Rs.2,60,000/- and 3) on 26.03.2013 for 3 years 15 days for the amount of Rs.5,78,000/-. As per the scheme the rate of interest was 9.65%. For some personal purpose he made pre-mature withdrawal of the 1st TDR on 20.02.2015 and the 2nd TDR on 14.01.2015. After the withdrawal he found that the bank correctly credited the TDR amount Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.2,60,000/- in his A/c No.40110100000110. But the trouble arose when he made premature withdrawal of the 3rd TDR on 31.08.2015 when to his surprise he found that the O.P. bank credited Rs.5,61,860/- instead of Rs.5,78,000/- in the said account. Be it mentioned this TDR opened on 26.03.2013 and due date of maturity was 10.04.2016. Therefore the complainant informed the matter in writing to the O.P./ Bank on 03.09.2015 asking the bank as to why the bank deducted the said amount of Rs.16,140/-. The bank manager informed that the said money was deducted by the main branch and following banking rule. Complainant alleges that such deduction of Rs.16,140/- from his TDR is illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable, only to cause mental harassment and financial loss. As the bank authority failed to co-operate with the complainant he files this case in the Forum with the above mentioned prayer.

The O.P./ Bank appeared and contested this case by filing written version. O.P. admitted the opening of TDR by the complainant, but having sufficient information regarding value, due date, period of interest etc. O.P. also admitted the premature withdrawal of the 3 TDR by the petitioner. That, O.P. tried their level based to make the complainant understand the reason of such deduction, which is as per guidelines of bank as well as of Reserve Bank of India. The said amount Rs.16,140/- was deducted from the 3rd TDR and processed by the Centralized Data Processing Centre at Mumbai and is beyond the capacity of Branch Manager of O.P./ Bank to refund the said amount. That the deduction is based upon policy norms, which were well informed and agreed upon by the petitioner at the time of opening TDR. That the said amount was recovered as penalty in interest plus excess interest on the face value of the TDR and the same was deposited to the petitioners account and was recoverable for premature withdrawal as per contract of the TDR. On 31.08.2015 his contractual full interest amount on this TDR was already deposited to the petitioner’s saving account by the ‘system’ of the bank on the same day of 31.08.2015. For that, automatically, at the time of repayment said recoverable amount (i.e. penalty plus excess interest already paid) was recovered from his face value of TDR amounting to Rs.16,140/-.  That the bank has no deficiency in service and there is no arbitrary illegal deduction as alleged by the complainant. Therefore, O.P. prays for dismissal of the case with cost.

To establish the case of the complainant has relied upon affidavit-in-chief sworn in by him as P.W.-1 and relied upon some documents. O.P. also filed documents but did not adduce any D.W.

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

Giving due consideration to the contents of the complaint petition, documentary evidence on record, hearing, arguments advanced by the lawyers of both sides, the Ld Forum has come to the findings as follows: -

Admittedly the complainant having an account in the branch of the O.P./ Bank at Raiganj deposited money in MIP Scheme 3 years and 15/16 days at the rate of interest 9.65% p.a. The copies of the TDRs are submitted. The complainant has been receiving interest month by month credited in his savings account the photocopy of the passbook proves this fact. The first two TDRs of Rs.2,00,000/- & Rs.2,60,000/- withdrawn premature, but there was no penalty charged by the Bank. In this respect the circular of the O.P./ Bank dated 04.02.2013 certified copy is submitted by the O.P. for perusal of this Forum. In this circular Point No.5.29 specifically stated about Waiver of Penalty on Premature Payment of Deposits up to Rs.5,00,000/- with minimum period of 12 months. In case of premature withdrawal of the above mentioned two TDRs fulfils the two conditions, that the said deposit remained with the Bank for a minimum period of 12 months and it does not exceed Rs.5,00,000/-. So, the petitioner receive full amount of the original face value and the complainant received the benefit of waiver.  

The complainant alleges that the dispute arose, when he received the premature withdrawal money of the 3rd TDR of face value of Rs.5,78,000/-. In this case there is charging of penalty for premature payment. The circular of the Bank specifically stated about the penal interest in this regard. The premature withdrawal of short deposits i.e. the deposits remained with the Bank for less than 12 months carry such penalty. Again such deposit of the face value exceeding Rs.5,00,000/- and up to Rs.5,00,00,000/- carry such penalty of 1% deduction from interest at such applicable rate or the contracted rate, whichever is lower. In this case the complainant received monthly interest for this said 3rd TDR on 31.08.2015 as usual, but on the same day he applied for premature withdrawal. Automatically, at the time of repayment the Bank imposed penalty and recovered the amount from its face value on TDR as the interest on dated 31.08.2015 was already credited to his account then the penalty plus excess interest paid was recovered by the Bank to the tune of Rs.16,140/- from the face value of the TDR.

We have gone through the guideline of RBI, Point No.25 Master Circular, dated 01.07.2014 with Banking Regulation Act, 1949 were submitted by the O.P. Regarding premature withdrawal the Circular is relevant. It is clear that the TDR account is closed and total money was withdrawn after expiry of two years from the date of opening of the TDR account. Then an amount equal to 1% of interest of the deposit shall be deducted. Therefore the O.P./ Bank has not committed any wrong by deducting the amount Rs.16,140/- as penalty from the face value of TDR of complainant. 

From the above discussions this Forum finds that the petitioner faces some financial loss for premature withdrawal of the TDR as it exceeds Rs.5,00,000/-. He received the contractual interest 9% plus .5% as senior citizen, but after deduction of 1% from interest as penalty, actually he received interest @ 8.5%. The Bank follows the Rules and Guidelines of its own as well as the Guideline of RBI correctly. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.P./ Bank  and the question of mental harassment does not apply in this case. Therefore the complaint fails.

Fees paid is correct. Hence, it is

ORDERED,

That the consumer complaint being No. CC-67/2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.P./ Bank without cost. Let copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.