West Bengal

Bankura

CC/37/2023

Ashok Singha - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, Union Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

Self

14 Nov 2024

ORDER

  IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANKURA

  Consumer Complaint No.37/2023

       Date of Filing:  27/04/2023

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                                          Ld. President      

2. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui                          Ld. Member

 

For the Complainant:Ld. Advocate Avik Roy Chowdhury

For the O.P.: Ld. Advocate Swarnendu Mondal

Complainant:

Ashok Singha, S/o Sukumar Singha, Prop. M/s Toto Bazar E Rickshaw, R/o.Panchbaga, Kenduadihi, Bankura, P.O. Kenduadihi, P.S. &  Dist. Bankura, PIN-722 102

Opposite Party:

Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Bankura Branch, 194/1 Natunganj, PO, PS & Dist.Bankura, PIN- 722101                                           

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT      

  

Order No.13

Dated:14-11-2024

Both parties  file hazira through Advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

After hearing argument from both side the Commission proceeds to disposed of the case as hereunder: -        

The Complainant’s case is that he is a bonafide customer having different type of Accounts with O.P./Bank including Current A/c No.608401010050236 in connection with his E-Rickshaw business. On 31/01/2020 O.P./Bank debited a sum of Rs.18,500/-from the said Current A/c with the entry of UBI, Bankura and next  month on 29/02/2020 similar deduction of Rs.30,750/- was made from the said Current A/c with entry “  To Loan installment paid  to UBI, Bankura.” All the accounts of the Complainant have become NPA for which O.A. No.191 of 2022 is pending before Debts Recovery Tribunal No.II at Calcutta. The Complainant by Advocate’s letter dt.30/06/2021 sought explanation from the O.P./Bank for the above mentioned two deductions without his knowledge and notice. O.P./Bank having failed to do so the Complainant has therefore approached this Commission for appropriate relief.

                                                                                                                                                                                         Contd…..p/2

Page: 2

O.P./Bank contested the case by filing a lengthy written version detailing the fate of all the accounts without touching on the above mentioned two transactions.

-: Decision with reasons:-

Having regard to the facts of the case, contention, submission, and documents on both sides the Commission finds that at the time of hearing Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Bank has exerted innocuous efforts to explain the above noted two transactions stating that the  Complainant is running E-Rickshaw business and the buyer in good faith used to pay EMI to the Complainant who could not however deposit the same in respective loan account  and the O.P./Bank could not but deduct said amount from the Current A/c of the Complainant whenever they were not in receipt of the EMI from the buyer. Above noted two deductions are made for the above reason. Similar practice has been followed by the O.P./Bank earlier in 2019 without objection from the Complainant.

Ld. Advocate for the Complainant has however contended before the Commission that deduction in such a way is not permissible under the Banking Rules and as such he is entitled to get compensation for shortfall of balance due to unauthorized deductions.

Ld.Advocate for the O.P./Bank has candidly admitted before the Commission that they are ready and willing to adjust the aforesaid deductions on 31/01/2020 and 29/02/2020 from the Current A/c of the Complainant.

Ld. Advocate for the Complainant has however prayed for litigation cost as the Complainant was dragged to file the instant case even after service of Advocate’s Letter dated: 30/06/2021 upon the O.P./Bank seeking explanation for the aforesaid two deductions from the Current A/c of the Complainant. Whatever be the explanation for such deductions the fact remains that Banker-Customer relationship between the parties has eroded for want of  transperency and communication gap.                                                                            

                                                                                                              Contd…..p/3                                                                                                                                       

Page: 3

With this observation the case is disposed of on contest with litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-  by directing the O.P./Bank to adjust the un-explained deductions of Rs.18,500/- and Rs.30,750/- from the Current A/c of the Complainant either by paying the said amount direct to the Complainant or reducing his liability to that extent towards outstanding dues within a month from this date I/D law will take its own course.

 

     __________________                                  ________________                        

 HON’BLE   PRESIDENT                           HON’BLE    MEMBER