Dated this the 25^th  day of May  2013

 

Present : Smt.Seena H, President

 

U.Muhammed Musthafa,

S/o.Ummar,

Barkath Manzil,

Pittupeedika, Koduvayur (PO),

Palakkad – 678 501                                         -       Complainant

(By Adv.M.Raveendran)

V/s

 

1.Branch Manager,

 

2.General Manager,

(By Adv.P.P.Gopalakrishnan &

 

By Smt.SEENA.H, PRESIDENT

 

Gist of the complaint :

Complainant’s mother Saharban pledged her finger ring weighing 2 gms with opposite party No.1 on 23/8/11 for an amount of Rs.2,000/-. Saharban died on 21/3/12. It was intimated to the opposite parties. Thereafter complainant paid the loan amount with interest. The  account was closed on production of death certificate and relationship certificate. Even after closing of the loan account, the opposite parties failed to release the pledged ornament to the complainant. Thereafter complainant sent a complaint to Banking Ombudsman. Complainant received a registered letter from 1^st opposite party intimating the dismissal of the complaint and further intimation regarding the additional documents to be submitted for claim settlement. It was asked to submit affidavit by two respectable persons well-known to the bank and claim settlement application signed by all the legal heirs infront of a respectable and person well-known to the bank. It was further informed that the applications for the same will be received from the bank and help can be had from the Branch Manager. Accordingly  complainant approached the opposite party bank with three persons having account in the bank, but opposite party refused to accept the said persons for want of sufficient money in the account. According to the complainant, the act of opposite parties amounts to clear deficiency in service on their part. Hence the complaint.

Opposite parties filed version contending the following:

Opposite parties  admits the fact that Saharban pledged her gold ring with opposite party No.1 and she expired. It was on the request of the complainant that the loan was closed. Opposite party transferred the balance in the Saving Bank Account of Saharban to her gold loan account and the further balance amount was remitted by the complainant.

The procedure for redemption of ornaments was well in advance informed to the complainant. The say of the complainant that the bank imposed various conditions for redemption of the ornaments after the closing of the gold loan amount is denied.  Under the death claim settlement scheme, the death certificate, claim application and declarations from two respectable persons worth enough and known to the bank are required to release the ornaments as per norms. The petitioner has not so far submitted any of the above except death certificate. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

The evidence adduced consists of the chief affidavit of the respective parties. Ext.A1 to A8, Ext.B1 and the oral testimony of PW1 and DW1.

 

Issues for consideration :

1.    Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ?

2.    If so, what is the relief and cost complainant is entitled to ?

Complainant’s mother pledged her gold ring  with the opposite party and the same was closed on her death by her son is an admitted fact. The specific allegation levelled against the opposite parties is that in addition to the documents required by law, opposite parties requested production of additional documents for release of pledged ornaments. According to the complainant, opposite parties having received the service charge is bound to    release the ornaments on the closure of the loan account. Opposite party contented that they have acted only as per rules and the requisite documents for redemption of pledged ornaments was well in advance informed to the complainant. Opposite parties could not release the ornaments as the complainant failed to produce the requisite documents.

Heard both parties and has gone through the entire evidence on record.

Going through the Manual of Instruction regarding settlement of death claims and nomination marked as Ext.B1, the following provisions seems relevant for the adjudication of the matter.

5.2.1 Claims above Rs.1,000/-

For processing the claims received from the claimants, the following papers / documents are to be obtained.

i)             Claim application in F.181 should be obtained

ii)           A true copy of the death certificate, duly verified and certified by the Officer / Manager or Photostat copy thereof. Even in the case of Photostat copy, it should be compared and verified with the original and certified accordingly by the Officer / Manager.

iii)         Two declarations in the prescribed forms (given in paragraph 8.1). In the case of testamentary succession irrespective of the amount of claim, branches have to obtain two declarations as per Appendix – I

iv)          All deposit receipts, passbooks, cheque book and related evidences of the deposits claimed. If the claimants are not in a position to produce the deposit receipts, passbooks, cheque book etc. the reasons thereof should be furnished in column 9 of F.181.

v)            Letter of authority as per Appendix-3/3(a) in favour of a claimant by other claimants (if one or more of the legal heirs require in the Bank to pay or release his / their share of the claim amount / assets to any other /s for and on behalf of him / them)

6.Claim Application

i) Village Officer

6.5 Claim application F.181 must be signed by all the major legal heirs. In

8.3 In respect of declarations obtained, it should be ensure that

iv) the declarants are respectable and well known to the Bank and are good

xi) the declarations are duly attested by two witnesses (without which they

The payment of claim amount / redemption of assets has to satisfy the following provisions. The complainant while cross examination has deposed that ആദരണീയനും ബാങ്കി ന്  അറിയാവുന്നതും  മതിയായ ആസ്തി യുള്ളവരുമായ ര്ണ്ട് പേര്  സമര് പ്പിക്കുന്ന സത്യ വാങ്ങ് മുലം  എന്നിവ  ആവശ്യ പ്പെട്ടി രുന്നു . ര്ണ്ട്  ആളുകളെ പാസ്സ് ബുക്ക്  കൊണ്ട് പോ യിരു ന്നു.  ആസ്തിയില്ല  എന്ന്  പർ ഞ്ഞ്  മട ക്കി. നോ ട്ടീ സ് കി ട്ടി യപ്പോ ള് വില്ലേജ്  ഓഫീസറുടെ  മുമ്പാകെ  claim form sign  ചെയ്തു കൊടുക്കണം  എന്ന്  പർ ഞ്ഞി രുന്നു. 

The evidence on record shows that the complainant has admitted the fact that the opposite parties has clearly informed the procedural formalities to be complied and the documents to be produced for redemption of ornament. Complainant himself has stated that he has taken two persons having account with the opposite party bank, but opposite party refused to accept them for want of sufficient account. Opposite party while dealing with death claim settlement has to act as per rules. Insisting production of documents as per rules, even if it causes hardship to the complainant cannot be termed as  deficiency in service. The further allegation that the opposite parties ill treated the complainant and the said customer infront of the others is not supported by any evidence.

In the light of the above discussion we are of the view that complainant miserably failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

In the result, complaint dismissed.

 

Pronounced in the open court on this the  25^th  day of May 2013.

Seena H

President

Preetha G Nair

Member

    

 

 

Ext.A1 – Pass book of late Saharban

Ext.A2 – Receipt for the payment of loan amount dtd.3/8/12

Ext.A3  – Photocopy of Election ID card

Ext.A4 – Photocopy of Death Certificate of Saharban

Ext.A5 – Photocopy of Relationship Certificate

Ext.A6 – Photocopy of letter sent by  Forum for Consumer Justice to the

Ext.A6 (a) series – Acknolwedgement cards.

 

 

 

Ext.A7 – Copy of complaint sent to Banking Ombudsman

Ext.A7 (a) - Acknowledgement card

 

Ext.A8 –  Letter sent by opposite party to the complainant dated 2/11/12 informing rejection of petition filed by the complainant before the Ombudsman.

 

PW1 –Muhammed Musthafa

 

DW1 – Laxmi.K.V.

 

 

Ext.B1 – Manual of Instructions

 

No cost allowed.