Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/209/2016

Jitendra Sodhi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bank of Maharashtra - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

14 Feb 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint  No	:	209 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	22.03.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	14.02.2017

 

 

 

 

Jitendra Sodhi s/o Lt. Col. B.K.Sodhi, H.No.2549-A (FF), Sector 47-C, Chandigarh 160047

 

              …………..Complainant

 

VERSUS

 

Bank of Maharashtra (BOM), Sector 47-C, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager.

 

…………… Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:   SH.RAJAN DEWAN          PRESIDENT

                                MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA           MEMBER

SH.RAVINDER SINGH            MEMBER

           

Present:    Complainant in person.

Sh.Sumit Narang, Counsel for Opposite Party

 

 

RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

         The facts in issue are that the complainant is having Savings Bank Account No.60108940377 with OP bank since 2012.  It is averred that the OP Bank deducted various hidden charges from the said saving bank account of the complainant to the tune of Rs.419.36 i.e. Rs.112.36 on 29.3.2015 for ATM + Debit Card, Rs.79/- on 10.5.2015 for minimum balance, Rs.79/- on 31.5.2015 for minimum balance, Rs.12 on 3.6.2015 for some insurance policy and Rs.137/- on 29.2.2017 for minimum balance.  It is also averred that the OP Bank deducted said amounts without any information to the complainant.  The complainant requested the Opposite Party bank to refund the amount deducted, but to no avail.  Hence, this complaint.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply stating that the complainant opened a savings account No.60108940377 with cheque book facility jointly with his wife in 2012 (Ann.R-1).  It is also stated that the complainant was also issued Debit cum ATM Card on opening of the account and was duly informed that the said service could become chargeable in future and complainant accorded his consent.  It is further stated that from 1.9.2013 the Debit cum ATM facility was made chargeable with annual maintenance fee of Rs.100/- plus service tax from second year onwards i.e. 1.3.2014 and this information was intimated to all cardholder through automated generated SMS, publication on notice board of all branches of the bank.  It is submitted that the premium of Rs.12/- towards Pradhan Mantri Jan Suraksha Bima Yojana Policy (PMSBY) providing death benefit upto 2 lakh, was deducted from the account of the complainant, but was later refunded back into his account, when he opted not to avail the said policy. It is also submitted that with effect from 1.2.2016, the minimum balance requirements for a savings account with cheque book facility was revised from Rs.1000/- to Rs.1500/- and the said information was intimated to all the account holder through automated generated SMS, publication on notice board of all the branches of the bank as well as uploaded on the website of the bank.  It is further submitted that the OP Bank has rightly deducting minimum balance charges of Rs.137/- from complainant’s account on account of non-maintenance of minimum balance of Rs.1500/-.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of allegations, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.     

 

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

4]       We have heard the complainant in person, ld.Counsel for Opposite Party and have carefully examined the facts and pleadings along with entire evidence on record.

 

5]       The OP – Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Sector 47, Chandigarh has deducted the following amount from the savings bank account No.60108940377 of the complainant on account of less minimum balance amount of Rs.1500/-:-

         ‘Rs.79/-     10.5.2015

          Rs.79/-     31.5.2015

          Rs.137/-    29.2.2016’.

6]       The OP has stated that as per revised guidelines dated 1.2.2016, the minimum balance requirement for the saving account with cheque book facility has been revised from Rs.1000/- to Rs.1500/- and justified the above deductions from the account of the complainant, as per revised guidelines. 

 

7]       From the perusal of Schedule of Service Charges, as revised with effect from 1.2.2016 (Ann.R-4) by OP against the Master Circular issued by RBI, it is observed that there is no instructions/guidelines regarding application of revised guidelines about the minimum balance of Rs.1500/- for account holders, which are in existence with the bank prior to 1.2.2016. The revised guidelines cannot be effective retrospectively and can only be applicable for the new savings bank account holders opened w.e.f. 1.2.2016.  The Opposite Party does not seem to have any legal right to impose any charges against the account of the complainant, which was in existence prior to issue of new guidelines. 

 

         The Reserve Bank of India, under Master Circular on Customer Service in Banks, issued consolidated instruction in the area of customer service by bank vide DBR No.Leg.BC. 21/09.07.006/2015-16, dated July 1, 2015, addressed to all scheduled banks, wherein under Para NO.4.1, the following has been specified :-

4.1     Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account (BSBDA)

Banks are advised to offer a 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' which will offer following minimum common facilities to all their  customers :

i.        The 'Basic Savings Bank Deposit Account' should be considered a normal banking service available to all.

ii.       This account shall not have the requirement of any minimum balance.

 

8]              The deductions made by the OP from the account of the complainant are penal in nature and cannot be made without prior proper notice/hearing to the complainant. The revised guidelines reportedly published by the Bank through its website or a general notice displayed in the bank. The complainant is not supposed to read every information available on the website of the bank.  He is not casual visitor of the bank and hence cannot afford to have access to such notices displayed in the board of the bank.  NO proper notice has been served upon the complainant before deductions by bank and as such the alleged deductions on account of minimum balance are unsustainable. 

9]       The OP has stated to have reversed Rs.12/- deducted against the Pradhan Mantri Jan Suraksha Bima Yojana Policy (PMSBY). The deduction of Rs.112/- on 29.3.2015 on account of ATM-cum-Debit Card renewal without his consent, also is untenable too. It is the prerogative of the complainant to continue with ATM Card facility or otherwise. The bank cannot deduct the renewal charges for ATM Card by default.    

 

10]      Keeping in view the facts as elaborated above, the complaint is allowed with direction to the Opposite Party Bank to credit the wrongly charged amount of Rs.407/- (Rs.295/-+Rs.112/-) in the Savings Bank Account No.60108940377 of the complainant, within Seven days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, along with Rs.2000/- as litigation expenses.  

         If the order is not complied within the stipulated period, the OP shall be further burdened with compensatory cost of Rs.5000/- payable to the complainant. 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

14^th February, 2017                          Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER