JUDGEMENT

          Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant availed of Cash Credit Facility on furnishing security by one Mr. Shibdas Dutta who was constituted of the op having C.D. account No. 400061110000081 by way of creating lien on his FD of Rs.6,75,000/- with Bank of India Bhowanipore Branch vide his F D Certificate No.1710860 dated 05.09.2008 to the op/Bank.

          In course of transaction of the said CD Account various amount was debited and credited and by way of such debit and credit on 15.06.2009 an amount of Rs.6,04,800.32 paisa became debit balance upon crediting Rs.10,000/- by cash in the said account.  But on the very same day i.e. 15.06.2009 a sum of Rs.6,07,000/- was credited in the complainant’s said account thereby a sum of Rs.2,199.68 paisa became credit balance in the said account of the complainants.

          But as because the said amount of credit balance Rs.2,199.68 paisa was lower than minimum balance a sum of Rs.200/- in average was debited per quarter and lastly on 31.01.2011 when the credit balance in the said account became Rs.504.68 paisa and Rs.10,000/- was credited and thereby the credit balance became Rs.10,504.68 paisa.  But suddenly on 31.12.2011 an interest of Rs.1,03,929/- has been charged and debited in the complainants’ said account and after adjusting credit amount of Rs.10,504.68 paisa and a sum of Rs.93,544.32 paisa is shown as debit balance in the said account and said balance is absolutely baseless and imaginary and upon obtaining statement of account the complainant met with the Branch Manager of the said bank and on enquiry op expressed his inability to help the complainant and in any manner on the plea that the said error has been cropped up due to default in system.

          Thereafter complainant lodged a complaint with the Hon’ble Banking Ombudsman on 02.02.2012 with a copy to the Chief Manager, Bank of India, Kolkata Main Branch but on the same day the op put some comments on the complainant’s office copy wherefrom it appears that the system did not apply interest from 28.07.2008 to 14.06.2009, although on the earlier occasion op admitted the same as error.  Subsequently complainant received a letter on 05.03.2012 from Hon’ble Banking Ombudsman, wherefrom complainants were advised to make written representation to the op and upon rejection of the complaint by the op or in the event, complainant does not receive any reply within a period of one month and if the complainants are not satisfied in that case complaint may be lodged before the Banking Ombudsman.  This letter was replied by the complainants’ letter dated 13.04.2012 which was duly received by the Banking Ombudsman.

          Subsequently it was reported on 07.05.2012 interest from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 was not in the system for which it was not accounted for but it was charged subsequently as interest and executed in the said account.  But complainant was not satisfied with such explanation and so complainant reported that for the error of the op is not liable to pay huge interest which is baseless and in the above circumstances complainant for negligent and deficient manner of service and also for unfair trade practice filed this complaint for relief.

          On the other hand op by filing this written version submitted that the entire allegation is false and practically on and from 27.07.2008 the account of the complainant was non-performing assets (NPA) and further submitted that outstanding interest in the account is always payable by the account holder and account is showing outstanding balance by addition of interest and it is also admitted that on 15.06.2009 balance was Rs.2,199.68 paisa and it is further submitted that as per Reserve Bank of India Rules against NPA no interest can be charged.  However, upon adjustment of Rs.6,07,000/- the account became standard and the account was treated to be standard and so credit balance interest which was due from 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 was charged.  It is further submitted that computer system applied temporary overdraft interest in the overdraft account on 31.12.2011 for the period from 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011.  However, on 31.12.2011 the computerized system recorded outstanding interest from 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 at Rs.1,03,929/- and upon application of interest the account again came to debit balance and complainants are aware of that they are liable to pay interest on debit balance and the interest is not charged twice because the complainants enjoyed and utilized the money as such they are liable to pay interest.

          So, the present proceeding is filed with intention not to pay interest on outstanding sum in the said account and moreover the bank has right to charge the said interest shall be charged twice and further submitted that a non-performing assets became alive on payment of Rs.6,07,000/-.  Thereafter it was given process.  So, back interest was included and there was no deficiency or negligent on the part of the op.

                                                 Decision with reasons

          Practically after hearing the argument of the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties and relying upon the submission of the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant including the complaint and also the statement of account upon which complainant relying much, we have gathered that the statement of account as filed by the complainant is for the period 01.07.2008 to 31.12.2011.  no doubt on 01.07.2008 balance was Rs.6,12,953/- and on 15.06.2009 balance was Rs.6,04,800/-.  But truth is that no interest was charged by the bank which is evident from the said statement of account.  Another factor is that prior to 01.07.2008, complainant did not clear the said cash credit amount which has been enjoyed by him.  So, invariably from 01.07.2008 the bank is entitled to get interest over the said amount.  But from 01.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 no such interest over the said dues was charged.  But only for minimum balance charged Rs.200/- only as assessed.  But no interest was assessed.  It is clear from the statement of account filed by the complainant.

          It is equally true that on 15.06.2009 complainant deposited Rs.6,07,000/- and balance was Rs.2,199.68 paisa.  Thereafter only for minimum balance at quarterly end @ Rs.200/- was deducted.  But no other charges was assessed.  So, complainant’s Ld. Lawyer relied upon the statement and submitted that up to 25.04.2011 outstanding balance was Rs.10,384.68 paisa.  But complainant on 17.02.2011 credited Rs.10,000/-.  So, balance amount ought to have been Rs.504.68paisa and on payment of that practically this account ought to have been closed.  But without taking any such step suddenly on 31.12.2011 op/bank included interest from 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 a sum of Rs.93,544.32 paisa and Ld. Lawyer of the complainant challenged this amount as included when no interest was charged prior to that.

          So, the entire claim of the op is unfounded and baseless.  But considering the argument of the Ld. Lawyer for the op and also considering the written version of the op that the said account was non-performing assest on and from 27.07.2008 and for which after deposit of Rs.6,07,000/- as on 15.06.2009 and further deposit of Rs.10,000/- on 17.02.2011 the said account was reopened and processed for which total interest from 27.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 was assessed and as because it is cash credit facility availed by the complainant.  So, complainant is liable to pay it.

          In this regard we have gone through the provision of the Reserve Bank of India Rules wherefrom it is found that in respect of non-performing assets no charge shall be assessed till full payment is made.  But it is found from the present account that complainant on 28.07.2008 the present account was not a non-performing assets in view of the fact on that date interest of Rs.11,182/- was assessed and Rs.12.09,2008/- complainant deposited Rs.5,000/-.  Thereafter complainant deposited another Rs.5,000/- on 31.05.2009 and further cash of Rs.10,000/- on 15.06.2009 and another amount of Rs.6,07,000/- from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 complainant deposited on 4 occasions i.e. a total sum of Rs.6,27,000/-.

          Then balance was shown Rs.2,199.68 paisa.  But from 01.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 complainant did not take any amount from the said cash credit.  But subsequently on 17.02.2011 complainant paid another Rs.10,000/- when that is the fact then it is clear that it was not non-performing assets as alleged by the Banking Authority because in case of non-performing assets the account shall be stand still and there is no scope to charge any sort of interest or anything.  But it was the duty of the bank to inform the customer to clear of the outstanding. But that has not been done.

Moreover it is found that bank assessed interest of Rs.11,182/- on 28.07.2008.  So, the balance was found Rs.6,24,135/- but when the complainant paid Rs.5,000/- and one Rs.10,000/- and lastly a sum of Rs.6,07,000/- on 15.06.2009 same were also adjusted and balance was shown of Rs.2,199.68 paisa.  But as per cash credit facilities if any account is opened minimum balance must be Rs.5,000/-.  So considering the above fact we are convinced to hold that there was no scope on the part of the op to assess any interest from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 over the such figure and balance Rs.6,04,800.32 paisa because on 15.06.2009, the balance figure became Rs.2,199.68 paisa after deposit of Rs.6,07,000/-.  Then how the op can charge interest over the amount of Rs.6,04,800/- from 15.06.2009 to 31.12.2011.  Interest can only be charged against Rs.2,199.68 paisa.  But fact remains minimum balance charge is deducted month by month and lastly balance was found Rs.504.68 paisa.

Moreover after considering the statement of account it is clear that complainant from 28.07.2008 to 17.02.2011 credited a sum of Rs.6,37,000/- i.e. credit balance that was credited by the complainant.  After considering that credit with debit balance, it is found that practically balance would be Rs.nil.  But as because on 31.12.2011 op/bank added Rs.1,03,929/- as interest.  So in the statement of account balance is shown Rs.93,544/-.  But after giving much reliance upon the RBI Rules and present statement account issued by the op/Bank we are confirmed that practically bank has no legal authority to assess any interest from 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011 over the amount of Rs.6,04,800/- because complainant on 15.06.2009 already cleared the balance and minimum balance became Rs.2,199.68 paisa but not more than that.  So, under any circumstances bank had no authority to assess any further interest w.e.f. 28.07.2008 to 31.12.2011.  but at best the op/bank had his right to asses interest from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 because on 15.06.2009 standard balance was found Rs.2,199.68 paisa and truth is that no doubt op/bank has his legal right to assess interest and after calculation of the interest over the said amount during the period from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 it is found that op/bank ought to have assessed a sum of Rs.33,000/- over the same and thereafter ought to have assessed interest over Rs.33,000/-.  But op did not adopt such procedure and practically assessed huge interest. 

So, considering all the above fact we are convinced to hold that as per statement, it is clear that from 28.07.2008 to 15.06.2009 complainant did not pay any interest and bank also did not asses any interest.  So, after considering RBI guideline and rules complainant is liable to pay total interest of Rs.33,000/- up to 15.06.2009 and after that over that Rs.33,000/- complainant shall have to pay another amount of Rs.7,000/- as interest over that Rs.33,000/-.  So, in total complainant is up to 31.12.2011 is liable to pay Rs.40,000/- as interest and after payment of the said amount by the complainant to the op, the said account shall be treated as closed finally.  But the said amount of Rs.40,000/- is not paid by the complainant within one month from the date of this order in that case bank shall have his authority to assess further interest w.e.f. 31.12.2011.  But if complainant deposits Rs.40,000/- within one month from the date of this order in that case account shall be treated finally closed and all lien etc. shall be discharged.

Accordingly this complaint succeeds in part.

Hence, it is

                                                   ORDERED

That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest but without any cost against the op.

Op is directed to receive Rs.40,000/- from the complainant within one month from the date of this order and complainant is directed to pay Rs.40,000/- to the op within one month from the date of this order and if complainant pays the same that shall be treated as finally closed and no further interest shall be assessed w.e.f 31.12.2011.  But if complainant fails to pay the said Rs.40,000/- as per spirit of this order in that case after 31.12.2011 op shall have his legal right to assess further interest over that Rs.40,000/- and penal action may be taken against complainant by the op/bank.

But it is specifically ordered that if complainant complies the order as per spirit of this judgement in that case op shall have to issue no dues certificate and release all lien against that loan account and discharge the liability of the quarter as already given by some other person.

Parties to comply the order within two months and after one month they must report the result (either of the parties) for taking further action for violation of the Forum’s order.