DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, CAMP COURT AT AMRITSAR, PUNJAB.

 

Complaint Case No : RBT/CC/2018/189

Date of Institution : 13.03.2018/29.11.2021

Date of Decision : 01.09.2022

Kamlesh Rani wd/o Shri Chaman Lal aged about 85 years resident of 100, RB Estate, Loharka Road, Amritsar through her son and attorney Mr. Ravinder Kumar s/o Late Shri Chaman Lal, resident of 100, RB Estate, Loharka Road, Amritsar. Now deceased through her legal heirs.- 

1. Ravinder Kumar s/o Chaman Lal (son of deceased)

2. Shashi Kumar s/o Chaman Lal (son of deceased)

3. Rama Rani w/o Sh. Raj Kumar daughter of Chaman Lal. (Daughter of deceased)

4. Shama Bhandari w/o Rakesh Kumar Daughter of Chaman Lal (Daughter of deceased).

Residents of 100, RB Estate, Loharka Road, Amritsar through attorney Mr. Ravinder Kumar s/o Chaman Lal, resident of 100, RB Estate, Loharka Road, Amritsar.        …Complainants

Versus

1. Central Bank of India, Chander Mukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai through Chairman cum Managing Director.

2. Senior Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Kairon Market, Hall Bazaar, Amritsar. 

…Opposite Parties

Complaint under The Consumer Protection Act.

Present: Sh. Raman Randev Adv counsel for complainants.

Sh. Nikhil Mahajan Adv counsel for the opposite parties.

Quorum.-

1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover : President

2. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg : Member

(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):

    The present complaint has been received by transfer from District Consumer Commission, Amritsar in compliance of the order dated 26.11.2021 of the Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh. The complainant filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act against Central Bank of India, Mumbai and another. (in short the opposite parties). 

2. The facts leading to the present complaint as stated by the complainant are that complainant had purchased an Money Multiplier Deposit Certificate for sum of Rs. 5,500/- on 6.1.1988 bearing No. 3664101821 at the rate of 10% quarterly compounded rate of interest for tenure of 84 months. But due to busy schedule the complainant forget to track this bank FDR and she neither withdrawn it nor renewed it. 

3. It is further alleged that on 13.1.2018 the complainant approached the bank stating that bank need to give her full interest as applicable FD rate till date and deposit the original FDR dated 6.1.1988. But opposite party No. 2 have not give the interest rate as applicable FD rate till date to the complainant. The complainant made complaints to the higher authorities. On 5.3.2018 the opposite party No. 2 issued a letter dated 5.3.2018 in which they stated Rs. 7,878.49 will be payable to the complainant on submission of Form 15H instead of Rs. 75,154/- as difference amount of interest. The complainant is entitled to get full interest rate as when complainant's FDR comes to maturity and renewal, neither the maturity amount have been transferred to the complainant's saving account nor auto renewal nor send a notification to the complainant nor send a demand draft to the address mentioned in the form. As per RBI Guidelines, if the investor is tracked within 14 days and wishes to continue with the FD, the deposit can be renewed and interest will be calculated from the very day of the maturity period. However, if the bank is unable to find the investor within 14 days after maturity, if will automatically renew the FD at the existing rate of interest. If an FD is not claimed, banks can renew it unlimited times. If an FD is not claimed for, Say, 2 or 3 consecutive tenors, the bank will do its best to contact the investor and seek instructions. If the investor can't be found. The nominee will be contacted and will be handed over the money. But the opposite parties are failed to do so. 

4. It is further alleged that the complainant is entitled to get full interest rate on FDR and comes to Rs. 96,310/- instead of 29,034.49 as on 16.2.2018 as per data as under.-

Date Sum Period Interest Maturity Date of 

Invested Value maturity

6.1.1988 5500 87 months 9.99% 11253 6.4.1995

6.4.1995 11253 87 months 11% 24711 6.1.2002

6.1.2002 24711 87 months 8.5% 45469 6.4.2009

6.4.2009 45469 87 months 8.5% 83665 6.1.2016

6.1.2016 83665 24 months 7.1% 96310 16.2.2018

5. It is further alleged that the complainant approached the opposite parties many times and requested to revert the above mentioned amount but of no use which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint is filed seeking the following reliefs.-

1) The opposite parties may be directed to pay the difference amount of Rs. 75,154/- of interest accrued on FDR.   

2) To pay Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of compensation for mental agony and harassment. 

3) To pay Rs 3,300/- as litigation expenses.  

4) Any other relief to which the complainant is found entitled. 

6. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite parties filed written reply taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable and complainant has not come to this Commission with clean hands.

7. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant deposited Rs. 5,500/- in fixed deposit No. 13/270 New No. 1647397516 on 6.1.1988 with maturity date 6.4.1995 with maturity value of Rs. 11,253/-. But the complainant had not approached the opposite party for its renewal up to 13.1.2018 and maturity amount became over due on 6.4.1995 and norms of overdue deposit were applicable on the account of the complainant. As per rules and regulations for over fixed deposits as prevailing if the overdue period is up to 14 days the deposit receipt can be renewed as of date i.e. date of maturity and at the rate prevailing on the date of maturity. If the overdue period exceeds 14 days then over deposit may be accepted as a fresh deposit in part or in full for a further period as specified by the depositor at the rate of interest as ruling on the date on which the fresh deposit is made.

8. It is further alleged that in the case of complainant the maturity amount of FDR remained over due for 22 years and the complainant approached in bank on 16.2.2018 and then over amount of fixed deposit was renewed for 12 months in account No. 3664101821. It is admitted that complainant made a complaint to the opposite party of allegations of harassment by not giving the full interest rate to the complainant. It is admitted that the opposite party sent a reply dated 5.3.2018 to the complaint of the complainant and made clear about the decision of higher authority of bank as under.-

1) Interest payable from 6.4.1995 to 12.4.1999 i.e. 4 years and 7 days at the rate of 6.50% and interest amount comes to Rs. 2939.81.   

2) Interest payable from 13.4.1999 to 16.2.2018 i.e. 18 years 10 months and 3 days at the rate of 7% and interest amount comes to Rs. 14,841,68.

3) Total overdue interest from 6.4.1995 to 16.2.2018 is Rs. 17,781.49.

4) Out of which interest of Rs. 9903.00 is already paid to the complainant at the time of renewal.

5) Rest interest of Rs. 7878.49 is payable to the complainant subject to submission of form 15H and amount of TDS at the rate of 10% on the entire overdue interest be deducted.

9. It is further alleged that the complainant did not approach the opposite party after the receipt of above letter and had filed the present complaint. The opposite party followed the rules regarding the payment of interest on fixed deposit of the complainant being overdue deposit. Interest paid to the complainant as per rules and regulations as applicable on overdue deposit. Rest of the allegations of the complaint are denied by the opposite party. Lastly, the opposite parties prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint with heavy costs. 

10. To prove his case the complainant tendered in evidence her  own affidavit Ex.C-1, documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-9, copy of interest rate chart by RBI Ex.C-10, copy of death certificate of Kamlesh Rani Ex.C-11 and closed the evidence. 

11. To rebut the case of the complainant the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Sanjeev Kumar Bhola Senior Manager Ex.OP-1/A, copy of rules and regulations for payment of interest on overdue deposit receipt Ex.OP-1, copy of letter dated 5.3.2018 Ex.OP-2 and closed the evidence.  

12. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record on the file.

13. It is admitted fact between the parties that the complainant deposited Rs. 5,500/- with the opposite party No. 2 on 6.1.1988 with maturity date 6.4.1995 and maturity value of Rs. 11,253/- vide Money Multiplier Deposit Certificate Ex.C-2. It is also admitted fact between the parties that thereafter the complainant approached the opposite party No. 2 for its renewal on 13.1.2018 and on 16.2.2018 she deposited renewed the amount of Rs. 21,156/- with maturity date 16.2.2019 and maturity value of Rs. 22,699/- vide term deposit receipt Ex.C-3. 

14. But the main grievance of the complainant is that the opposite parties have not given her the FDR interest and only gave simple interest. She also gave calculations with the FDR interest vide which her amount comes to Rs. 96,310/- on 16.2.2018. She also wrote letters and mails to the opposite parties in this regard for balance payment of Rs. 75,154/- Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-6 which were duly received by the opposite parties but nothing has been done by the opposite parties. She also filed chart of FDR interest rates of different years Ex.C-10. 

15. On the other hand the opposite parties submitted that the complainant had not approached the opposite party for the renewal of FDR up to 13.1.2018 and maturity amount became over due on 6.4.1995. They further submitted that as per rules and regulations for over fixed deposits as prevailing if the overdue period is up to 14 days the deposit receipt can be renewed as of date i.e. date of maturity and at the rate prevailing on the date of maturity. If the overdue period exceeds 14 days then over deposit may be accepted as a fresh deposit in part or in full for a further period as specified by the depositor at the rate of interest as ruling on the date on which the fresh deposit is made. But in the present case the maturity amount of FDR remained over due for 22 years and the complainant approached in bank on 16.2.2018 and then overdue amount of fixed deposit was renewed for 12 months in account No. 3664101821. The opposite party also sent letter dated 5.3.2018 Ex.C-9/Ex.OP-2 to the complainant vide which they clarified all the interest rates given to the complainant. In this letter it is mentioned that the opposite parties gave 6.50% interest from 6.4.1995 to 12.4.1999 and 7% from 13.4.1999 to 16.2.2018 and total interest comes to Rs. 14,841.68. It is also mentioned in this letter that total interest from 6.4.1995 to 16.2.2018 comes to Rs. 17,781.49 out of which Rs. 9903/- already paid to the complainant and rest interest of Rs. 7878.49 is payable on the submission of Form 15H and in absence an amount of TDS at the rate of 10% on the entire overdue interest be deducted. Even the opposite parties also filed copy of rules and regulations Ex.OP-1 in which in rule 8.7 Renewal of Overdue deposits all details mentioned on the basis of which the opposite parties have given interest to the complainant. 

16. Complainant in his affidavit Ex.C-1 had taken a plea that as per Reserve Bank of India Guidelines if the investor is tracked within 14 days and wishes to continue with the FD, the deposit can be renewed and interest will be calculated from the very day of the maturity period. However, if the bank is unable to find the investor within 14 days after maturity, if will automatically renew the FD at the existing rate of interest. If an FD is not claimed, banks can renew it unlimited times. If an FD is not claimed for, Say, 2 or 3 consecutive tenors, the bank will do its best to contact the investor and seek instructions. If the investor can't be found then the nominee will be contacted and will be handed over the money. But to support this plea the complainant has not filed any document or any notification of the RBI, so this plea of the complainant is no force. On the other hand the opposite parties have given all the details and rules and regulations of the RBI on the basis of which the opposite parties have given interest to the complainant. So, in our view there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. 

17. In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in present complaint and same is accordingly dismissed. However, no order as to costs or compensation. Copy of the order will be supplied to the parties by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar as per rules. File be sent back to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar. 

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:

        1st Day of September 2022

 

 

            (Ashish Kumar Grover)

            President

              

(Navdeep Kumar Garg)

Member