Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/141/2022

Sreedhara Rao.N.G advocate - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager,Kotak Mahindra Bank limited, - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.Sreedhar rao.N.G

28 Jul 2023

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:07/10/2022

DISPOSED ON:28/07/2023

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHITRADURGA.

C.C.NO:141/2022

DATED: 28^th JULY 2023

 

PRESENT: Kum. H.N. MEENA, B.A., LL.B., PRESIDENT

                Smt. B.H. YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER  

 

COMPLAINANT/S	Sri Sreedhara Rao N.G, Advocate, Aged about 67 Years, R/o Sree Shanthi Niketana, 9th Cross, 2nd Phase, I.U.D.P Layout, Chitradurga-577501.   (Rep by In Person)
V/s
OPPOSITE PARTIE/S	Branch Manager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., 3221, Box No.13,     Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Registered Office, 27 BKC, C27, G Block, Bandra (E),     (Rep by C.M.Veeranna, Advocate)

 

 

::ORDER::

 

 

By Smt. B.H.YASHODA, B.A., LL.B., LADY MEMBER.

 

 

        This is a complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 2 of the consumer protection Act 2019, seeking relief against the OPsto pay Rs.4,99,000/- as compensation for defamation, damage to credit worthiness faith, confidence mental agony, cost of the prosecuting this complaint and damage to the profession of the complainant along with interest 24 % per annum on the money withheld by the OPs and for such other relief as this Commission deems fit.

 

2. The Brief facts of the complaint is as follows:

 

Complainant was holding a Savings Bank Account bearing No: 103010013850 (for short 'account') since last 5 decades. On 03/10/2022 complainant account balance was Rs.31,604.59/- with the OP No.1. On 03/09/2022 complainant issued cheque bearing No.000049 for Rs.26,000/- in favor of One Ravi C.H.  But OP 1 refused to pay the amount. On the back of the cheque OP 1 wrote that cheque is returned for "Account Frozen".  On enquiry OP 1 told that complainants account is frozen for want of Re KYC.  OP 1 issued a un-numbered and un-dated letter mentioning that "We could not able to process due to freeze marked in your account" once the KYC is updated same will be removed".  During 28/06/2022 complainant received a email for providing new account opening form, latest photo and copy of pan card etc. On 01/07/2022 complainant submitted all the required documents i.e.,

1.  New Account opening form with details and signed by the holder 2. Self-attested copy of I.D. Proof of the holder. 
3. Self-attested copy of address proof of document of all holders.
4. Self-attested copy of pan card or duly filed form No: 60. 
5. FATCA declaration and latest photograph of all holders.

 

      3. Branch manager and operations managers fraudulently
mis utilized the bank and signed formats filed by the complainant.  Further, OPs raised a service request for change of name of complainant without obtaining express or implied consent of the complainant.  In fact, complainant was not intended to change his name.  Branch manager and operations manager orally demanded the complainant for publishing change of name in two leading newspapers but complainant refused to give publications in newspapers and OPs intimated the complainant that OPs bank can freeze the account.  OPs bank cannot withhold the pension money of complainant for want of paper publications.

 

 

   4. As per chapter VI customer due diligence (CDD) procedure part V-on going due diligence contained in master direction know your customer (KYC) direction 2016 (updated as on 10/05/2021) in the case from the existing customers, RE shall obtain the permanent account number or equivalent e-document thereof or Form No.60, by such date as may be notified by the central government failing which RE shall temporarily cease operations in the account till the time the permanent account number or equivalent e-documents thereof or Form No.60 is to be submitted by the consumer.  On 27/09/2022 OPs transmitted a mail for updating of KYC.  In this mail OPs required the complainant to furnish within 30 days from date of mail though complainant have complied all the KYC details as following…

1. New Account Opening Form with details of all the holders and signed by all holders.
2. Self-attested copy of Address proof documents of all holders.
3. Self-attested copy of PAN card or duly filled Form No.60.
4. FATCA declarations.
5. Latest photos of all holders. 

    But OP bank is causing hardship and mental agony to the complainant.  On 03/10/2022 one Sri Ravi C.H visited OP bank for encashing the cheque but cashier of OP bank told that account has been closed.  Hence OPs deliberately intentionally, unlawfully and illegally dishonored the cheque, for the reason "Account has been frozen".  Hence OPs bank have made the representative of the complainant to wait outside the premises of the OP bank.  Because of the OP bank conduct of business is very irritating and scathing.  As per mail dated: 27/09/2022 dishonor of cheque before 30 days from 27/09/2022 amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Hence complainant have filed this present complaint.

 

 

   5. After issuance of the notice to OPs.  OPs appeared through their counsel and have filed their version.  In the version of OP 1 &2 it is contended that complaint is not maintainable either on facts or in law and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine. Complainant was maintaining savings bank account with OP 1of Chitradurga branch.  The Reserve Bank of India vide its circular RBI/2014-15/269DBOD. AML. BC. No. 44/14.01.001/2014-15 dated October 21/2014 directed the banks to comply the mandatory requirement to satisfy that the KYC details of customers registered in their records are current and updated.  Further, instructed the banks to strictly adherence of the said mandate issued by the RBI.  In due compliance of the RBI directives, the OP bank had requested the complainant to submit a self-certified declaration along with self-attested KYC documents to keep their records updated.  However complainant has failed to furnish the required details.  In spite of the repeated remainders the OP bank had not received the relevant documents for updating the KYC intimation and hence with no other alternative OP bank was marked "Debit Freeze" in the account of the complainant and an intimation mentioning the same was also sent to the complainant.  OP is bound to comply with RBI guidelines and regulations and
non-compliance of the directives of RBI would lead to penal action against the OP from RBI under the provisions of the banking regulations act 1949 as per RBI circular dated 21/10/2014.

 

   6. Subsequent to marking of debit freeze in the account of the complainant, the complainant had immediately approached the OPs bank on 27/09/2022 submitted the details for updating and confirming KYC details.  On scrutinizing documents, it was observed that, the name as reflected in Aadhar card is different from the name which is updated as per the OP bank records at the time of account opening and also notarized affidavit for name confirmation cannot be treated for change of name. Hence, the OP bank has advised the complainant to submit paper publication along with notarized affidavit for change of name of complainant, however the complainant has failed to submit the said documents in spite of repeated remainders made by the OP bank.  OP bank in a customer centric approach and on the proper due diligence made by the OP bank the due KYC details has been duly updated on 15/10/2022 and normal transactions were permitted in the account of the complainant.  In view of the above said facts there is no negligence, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OP bank as such complaint filed against the opposite party is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.  Further OPs denies all other allegations made in the complaint and prays to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost.

 

   7. Affidavit evidence of complainant is filed reiterating the facts mentioned in the complaint and got marked documents from Exhibit A-1 to A-3.

 

   8. Affidavit evidence of OP is filed by one Sri Jotiba Pareet reiterating the facts mentioned in the version and got marked documents from Exhibit B-1 & B-2.

 

   9. Written arguments of complainant is filed and also heard oral arguments.  Though sufficient opportunity was granted to OP but OP did not choose to file either written arguments or oral arguments.  Hence arguments of OP was taken as nil.

 

       10. Points that arise for our consideration are as follows:-

 

1. Whether complainant proves deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?
2. Whether complainant is entitled for the relief as sought in the complaint?
3. What Order?

 

        11. Our answers to the above points are as follows:

1. Negative
2. Negative
3. As per final order

 

:: REASONS::

       12. Point No.1 &2:- On perusal of the pleadings of both the parties it is not in dispute that complainant was having savings bank account bearing No.103010013850. On 03/10/2022 complainant account balance was Rs.31,604.59/- with the OP 1 bank, complainant issued a cheque bearing No.000049 for a sum of Rs.26,000/- but OP bank refused to pay the amount through cheque on back of the cheque OP1 wrote the cheque is returned as "account closed".  OP1 also initiated the complainant that his account has been closed for want of RE-KYC.  OP 1 also issued letter dated 03/10/2022 mentioning that OP1 is not able to process due to freeze marked in the complainant account for  KYC updation.  Again on 28/06/2022 complainant received email for providing account opening form, latest photo, pan card, address proof document, FATCA declaration along with one latest photograph of the complainant.  Further, Complainant submitted all the required documents stated above on 01/07/2022.  But OP 1 in his version has contended that as per RBI guidelines 2014-15/269 DBOD BC No.44/1401.001/2014-15 bank has to comply the mandatory requirement to the OP but complainant have not produced any document to show that he has submitted the required documents sought by OP No.1 as per letter dated 03/10/2022 e.t. Exhibit A-1 If complainant failed to furnish the required documents to OP bank, as OP bank had not received required documents for updating KYC information the OP 1 bank with no other alternative marked the complainant account as debit freeze and intimation was also sent to the complainant intimating the same, as per Exhibit A-2.  Later on 27/09/2022.  Complainant approach OP bank and submitted the details for updating and confirming KYC details. 

 

 

13. While scrutinizing the documents OP 1 bank observed that the name of the complainant reflected in Aadhar card is different from the name which is updated as per the OP 1 bank records at the time of account opening. Complainant submitted notarized Affidavit for name confirmation but OP1 initiated the same cannot be treated as government issued documents for change of name and hence OP bank advised the complainant to submit paper publication along with notarized Affidavit for change of name of the complainant. However complainant failed to submit the said documents in spite of the repeated reminders made by the OP 1 bank.  Now the complainant alleges that though he has submitted documents OP bank is making the complainant to run from pillar to Post.  On perusal of the records it reveals that complainant name is "SHREEDHARA RAO N.G." in the original complaint filed before this commission.  In the Affidavit evidence of the complainant the name of complainant is mentioned as SHREEDHARA RAO.  As per Exhibit A-3 the pass book of the complainant with the OP 1 bank which depicts that the name of the complainant as N.SREEDHAR RAO by perusing the same we can ascertain that there is some disparity in the name of the complainant.  In the complaint filed by the complainant before this commission his name is mentioned as SREEDHARA RAO N.G in the Affidavit evidence of complainant his name is mentioned as Sreedhara Rao without initial and as per Exhibit A-3 i.e., the pass book issued by OP 1 bank complainant name is mentioned as N.Sreedhara Rao. Now there are 3 names of the complainant and complainant also not produced the required documents to ascertain the same through his I.D i.e., Aadhar card, pan card etc., and also have not submitted any documents for KYC updation to show that he has complied the formalities of the OP bank as per RBI guidelines.  Complainant have issued a cheque to a 3^rd party i.e., C.H.Ravi for a sum Rs.26,000/- on 03/09/2022 but as per Exhibit-A-1 OP 1 bank have issued an intimation letter to the complainant for KYC updation in which OP submits that the cheque issued by the complainant was on 03/10/2022.  If the cheque was issued as per complainant to one Shri Ravi C.H the same could have been withdrawn by the said person before OP bank intimation of account freeze, complainant submits that he had sent 3^rd person C.H.Ravi to withdraw the pension amount to the complainant then the same could have been withdrawn before freezing of the account by OP 1 bank if the money was necessary at that time to the complainant or to a 3^rd party.  Complainant have also not produced copy of the cheque to ascertain the correct date of issuance of the cheque.  All these facts reveals that there is disparity in the name of the complainant, date of the cheque.  Further no relevant documents has been produced by the complainant to show that he has furnished all the required documents as per OP 1 bank hence complainant has failed to furnish the required details and also OP bank have not received the relevant documents for updating the KYC information well within time as per RBI guidelines and  directives. OP bank is bound to comply with RBI guidelines 2014-15 and regulations non-compliance of the directives of RBI would lead to penal action against the OP 1 bank from RBI under the provisions of the banking regulation Act. Complainant without following the guidelines and have also not produced cogent documents to show that he has come before this commission with clean hands.  Complainant has failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and hence we answer point No.1 & 2 in the negative.

 

 

14. Point No.3 :-For the foregoing reasons we proceed to pass the following order.  

 

:: ORDER ::

 

    The complaint filed by the complainant Under Section 2 Consumer Protection Act           2019 is hereby dismissed.

No order as to cost.

 

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, the transcript corrected, revised and

then pronounced in the open commission by us on 28^thJuly 2023.)

 

 

 

            LADY MEMBER                                 PRESIDENT

  

-:ANNEXURES:-

 

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1: Sri Sreedhara Rao Advocate,by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

 

01	Exhibit B-1	Kotak Mahindra Bank Letter dated:03/10/2022
02	Exhibit B-2	Update your KYC details  letter dated:27/09/2022
03	Exhibit B-3	Kotak Mahindra Bank Pass book Original

 

 

Witness examined on behalf of Opponent:

 

D.W-1: Jotiba Pareet S/o Sri Babu Pareet, by way of affidavit

            evidence

 

Documents marked on behalf of opponent:

 

01	Exhibit B-1	Reserve Bank Of India  dated:21/10/2014
02	Exhibit B-2	Kotak Mahindra Bank Authority  letter

 

  

         LADY MEMBER                                    PRESIDENT

 

 

 

S