Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/234/2019

Raj Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

11 Sep 2019

ORDER

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

============

Consumer Complaint  No	:	234 of 2019
Date  of  Institution	:	24.04.2019
Date   of   Decision	:	11.09.2019

 

 

 

 

 

Raj Kumar aged about 54 years son of Kashmiri Lal, House No.54, Backside Dhillon Farm, City Enclaves, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab.

 

             …………..Complainant

 

Versus

 

Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Plot No.821, Industrial Area, Phase-II, Ram Darbar, Chandigarh.

 

 …………… Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:  SH. RAJAN DEWAN           PRESIDENT

                                MRS. PRITI MALHOTRA       MEMBER

SH.RAVINDER SINGH          MEMBER

           

 

Argued By:

Complainant in person.

Sh.Ajay K.Sapheia, Adv. for Opposite Party

 

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

                                 Briefly stated, the complainant has opened a Current Account No.3247002100026241 in the name of MOHIT ENTERPRISES    with OP Bank, which was got closed on 24.7.2017 by getting the amounts transferred to another account.  It is averred that complainant received a message from LIC of India that an amount of Rs.31,500/- has been credited in his current account through NEFT. It is also averred that when the complainant visited OP Bank to know how the amount has been credited in his closed current account, he was told that the account has not been closed and the said accounts shows the amount of Rs.25400/- and deduction of Rs.6000/- due to low balance.  The complainant agitated the deducting of Rs.6000/- by the Opposite Party from his current account on account of low balance and requested the Opposite Party to refund the same, but to no avail.  A legal notice was also sent to Opposite Party, but to no effect. Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging the said complaint & conduct of Opposite Party as gross deficiency in service.

 

2]       The Opposite Party has filed reply stating that the complainant was having current account in the name of ‘Mohit Enterprises’ and as per bank record, the said account in question has never been closed.  It has been stated that mere transfer of amount from one account to another account does not mean that account stands closed.  It is also stated that if the complainant has closed the said account, he must have some receipt or entry to that effect, but complainant did not produce any such evidence.  It is submitted that the amount was rightly credited in the account of the complainant as per instruction of the complainant and the bank had deducted the amount as per bank guidelines.  Pleading no deficiency and denying other allegations, the Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       The complainant also filed replication reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the Opposite Party made in their reply.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have perused the entire record.

 

6]       The contention of the complainant is that even after closure of his Current Account No.3247002100026241 with OP Bank, the Bank still allowed the credit of LIC Policy amount of Rs.31,500/- and deducted Rs.6000/- from that amount towards non-maintenance of minimum balance, which is wrong.

 

7]       On contrary, the contention of the Opposite Party is that the said Current Account No.3247002100026241 was never closed by the complainant, as alleged, and as the complainant failed to maintain minimum balance in the said account, as required, so he has rightly been charged for that.

 

8]       We find merit in the contention of Opposite Party. The complainant failed to prove the closure of account in question, as alleged, by leading any documentary evidence.  As far as deduction of non-maintenance of minimum balance charges are concerned, the same are found to be rightly levied by the Opposite Party, in view of circular dated 22.10.2012 of OP bank (Ann.OP-1), wherein under Clause (d), it is stipulated that “Incidental charges for non-maintenance of minimum quarterly average balance for any closure of account during a quarter shall be levied for full quarter.”. 

 

9]       In view of above discussion & findings, we are of the opinion that no case of deficiency in service is made out against the Opposite Party. Therefore, the present complaint is dismissed being without merit, with no order as to cost.

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

Announced

11^th September, 2019                       Sd/-                                           

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER