IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KOTTAYAM
Dated, the 18th day of May 2022.
Present: Sri. Manulal V.S. President
Smt. Bindhu R. Member
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
C C No. 178/2012 (Filed on 14-05-2012)
Petitioner : P.T. Mathew,
Plathottam House,
Mukkuzhi, Poonjar,
Thekkekkara P.O.
Kottayam -686582
(Adv. Sajith C. George)
Vs.
Opposite parties : 1) Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Poonjar South P.O.
Kottayam - 686582 `
(Adv. A.J. Dominic)
2) Zonal Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Momtilth Road,
Near Egmore, Chennai.
3) General Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Nariman Point, Mumbai – 21.
(For Op2 and 3, Adv. A.J. Dominic)
Additional opposite party 4) Kerala State Electricity Board,
(impleaded as per IA 297/15) Rep. by its Secretary,
Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom P.O.
Trivandrum.
Additional opposite party 5) Chief Engineer (Civil),
(impleaded as per IA 297/15) Investigation and Arbitration,
Kerala State Electricity Board,
Vydyuthi Bhavan, Pattom,
Trivandrum – 4.
O R D E R
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member
The case is filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The brief of the complaint is as follows.
The complainant was a customer of the opposite party, the Poonjar Branch of Central Bank of India from 06-01-1972 with account No.211. In the year 1984, the complainant undertook the construction work of Vydyuthi Bhavan of K.S.E.B. at Thrissur. The P.A.C. of the work was around 60 lakhs and the time of completion was 2 years. The Bank had given an overdraft facility of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant.
On 22-12-1984, the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- at Poonjar Branch of Central Bank of India as a security deposit for the above said work in the form of M.M.D.C deposit for a period of 3 years. It was a lean deposit in favour of the Chief Engineer, Civil, K.S.E.B. Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram. The work was completed in 1988 only. Complainant filed suit against the KS.E.B. claiming damages and revision of rate in the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. As per the agreement for the work, the security will only be released after final settlement of work bill. As the Civil case is pending, the MMDC got renewed several times. The MMDC got matured on 22-12-1995 and the maturity amount was Rs.3,03,815/-. The MMDC was renewed on 09-06-1997 for 5 years with effect from 22-12-1995 with the maturity value Rs.5,75,984/- on 22-12-2000. Thereafter the same was renewed on 12-05-2011 for 555 days. The principal amount on the date of this renewal was Rs.10,82,060/- as on 22-12-2010. Being the most valuable customer, the complainant is eligible for 1% extra interest. By adding this 1% additional the total interest will be Rs.6,21,980/- making the value of MMDC to be 17,04,840/- as on 22-12-2010. The complainant is also eligible to get 0.5% additional interest being a Senior Citizen. The MMDC was closed on 22-07-2016 and the Bank had given only 16,55,772/- to the complainant. The complainant is eligible to get the balance amount of Rs.14,80,959/- from the Bank. The act of the opposite parties in not renewing the MMDC on the maturity dates and not giving the quarterly compound interest and other benefits is deficiency in service on their part. Hence this case.
On admission of the complaint, copy of the complaint was duly served to the opposite parties.
Opposite parties appeared, version was filed for opposite parties 1, 2 and 3 jointly and 5th opposite party filed version for opposite parties 4 and 5. An additional version was also filed by the opposite parties 1, 2 and 3.
As per version of the opposite parties 1, 2 and 3, the fixed deposit in the dispute is the security given by the complainant to K.S.E.B. in connection with the contract work namely construction of Vydythi Bhavan, Thrissur undertaken by the complainant. The security deposit was undertaken by the complainant by depositing Rs.1,00,000/- on 22-09-1984 at Central Bank of India, Poonjar Branch. The fixed deposit receipt signified as Money Multiplier Deposit Certificate (MMDC) was issued in the name of Chief Engineer (Civil) KSE Board. The deposit was later renewed as required and when renewal was made after the maturity date, the overdue interest for the period from the date of maturity to the date of renewal was added to the maturity value for fixing the amount of deposit. Renewal of the fixed deposit MMDC was made on 09-05-1997 with effect from 22-12-1995. On 09-05-1997, the amount of deposit was calculated as Rs.3,03,815/- and was renewed upto 22-12-2000 with a maturity value of Rs.5,75,984/-. The complainant did not approach the Bank either for collecting the maturity amount by closing the deposit or for renewing the deposit on 22-12-2000. The complainant approached the Bank for getting the fixed deposit renewed only on 18-01-2011. Finally, the MMDC was renewed on 12-05-2011 for a period of 555 days by producing a duplicate of the fixed deposit receipt. The amount of fixed deposit was fixed as Rs.10,82,850/- on 12-05-2011 and was renewed from 12-05-2011 to 17-11-2012. The overdue interest for the period from 22-12-2000 to 12-05-2011 was added to the maturity value of Rs.5,75,984/- The maturity value of the fixed deposit on 17-11-2012 was fixed at Rs.12,46,391/-. The fixed deposit was renewed as required by the complainant and as per the rules and regulations of the Bank with respect to fixed deposits. As the MMDC belonged to KSEB, the complainant is not entitled to get interest at any excess or special rate as claimed by the complainant. The complainant is not entitled to get Rs.6,21,980/- as interest to be added to the amount of Rs.10,82,850/- which was taken as the capital amount for renewing the MMDC on 22-12-2010. The allegation of the complainant that the Bank retained an amount of Rs.14,80,954/- as balance after releasing the amount of Rs.16,55,772/- to the complainant on 22-07-2016 is wrong and against the actual fact and situation.
As per the version of the 4th and 5th opposite parties, KSEB has entered into a contract with the complainant for the construction of Vydyuthi Bhavan, Thrissur in the year 1984. As per the terms of the contract, the complainant had furnished security deposit in the form of MMDC for Rs.1,00,000/- of Central Bank of India. From the year 1990 onwards, litigation initiated by the complainant against KSEB in Civil Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The complainant’s eligibility to get the security deposit released is depending on the outcome of the civil proceedings.
The complainant filed proof affidavit and marked documents Exts.A1 to A18 and the complainant was examined as Pw1.
The opposite parties 1 to 3 filed proof affidavit and marked documents Ext.B1.
In order to get an expert opinion regarding the dispute, a Chartered Accountant was appointed as Expert Commissioner and the Expert Commissioner filed the report.
On the basis of the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced, we would like to consider the following points.
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- If so, what are the reliefs and costs?
For the sake of convenience, we would like to consider point No.1 and 2 together.
Ongoing through the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence adduced, it is clear that the complainant is an account holder of the Central Bank of India, Poonjar branch since 06-01-1972 with account No.211. In the year 1984, complainant had taken the contract for the construction of Vydyuthi Bhavan, Thrissur and as a security for the said work the complainant deposited Rs.1,00,000/- at Poonjar Brach of Central Bank of India on 22-12-1984 in the form of Money Multiplier Deposit Certificate (MMDC) in the name of Chief Engineer, (Civil) KSEB, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram for a period of 3 years. The time of completion of the construction was a period of 2 years. But the construction work was completed in 1988 only. Complainant filed suit against K.S.E.B. claiming damages and revision of rates in Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The security deposit was not released to the complainant since the final settlement of work bill was not done. As the Civil case is pending, the MMDC deposit got renewed several times. The MMDC got matured on 22-12-1995 to Rs.3,03,815/-. The MMDC was then renewed on 09-06-1997 for 5 years with effect from 22-12-1995, with maturity value Rs.5,75,984/- on 22-12-2000. The MMDC was not renewed on 22-12-2000 and thereafter the MMDC was renewed only on 12-05-2011 for 555 days by fixing the value of MMDC as 10,82,860/- as on 22-12-2010. The MMDC was closed on 22-07-2016 and the complainant was given Rs.16,55,772/- by the Manager, Poonjar Branch of Central Bank of India .
Ext.A2 is the letter issued by the first opposite party dated 16-07-1997. Ext.A2 certifies that the complainant is maintaining a term deposit in the name of Chief Engineer (Civil), KSE Board as security deposit with deposit No.28/38 an amount of Rs.3,03,815/- for a period of 60 months and with due date 22-12-2000 with maturity value Rs.5,75,984/-. Ext.A5 is the letter issued by the 1st opposite party to the Chief Engineer (Civil construction) KSE Board stating that after completing the procedures, the duplicate copy of the term deposit receipt No. MMDC 28/38 was issued on 25-03-2011 and is renewed for a period of 555 days as per the request by the complainant with deposit No.MMDC-3122368124 dated 12-05-2011 and the original is enclosed for safe custody and copy of the letter marked to the complainant.
Ext.A6 is the copy of the MMDC issued on 12-05-2011 with No. MMDC No.3122368124 with principal amount Rs.10,82,860/- and period 555 days, interest 9.4% with maturity value Rs.12,46,391/- and date of maturity 17-11-2012.
Ext.A7 is the copy of application under Right to Information Act submitted by the complainant before the 1st opposite party and Ext.A8 is the reply received from the 1st opposite party for the Ext.A7 application.
In Ext.A8, it is stated that the deposit was due on 22-12-2000. The party has approached the branch for renewal only on 15-05-2011. Auto renewal of fixed deposit was started in the Bank from 01-08-2006 and with effect from 13-07-2009 auto renewal is only for 12 months. Ext.A10 is the copy of the complaint dated 03-06-2011 submitted before the second opposite party by the complainant. Ext.A11 is the copy of the complaint dated 27-09-2011 submitted before the third opposite party by the complainant.
The opposite parties 1,2 and 3 filed proof affidavit and marked Ext.B1. Ext.B1 is the certified copy of Rules regarding payment of interest on overdue domestic term deposits and renewal thereof with term deposit rates.
A Chartered Accountant was appointed as Expert Commissioner to scrutinize the growth of the MMDC No.28/38 in the dispute. The Expert Commissioner filed the report. However both the complainant and opposite party 1,2 and 3 filed objection to the commission report.
According to the commission report, the original deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited on 22-12-1984 become Rs.3,03,815/- on 22-12-1995 and became Rs.5,75,984/- on 22-12-2000. This amount is agreed by both the parties.
As per the rules and regulations of the Central Bank of India, the fixed deposit is entitled to get quarterly compound interest on Auto renewal of the fixed deposit on 01-08-2006 upto 12-07-2009. Since the bank had restricted auto renewal only for 12 months from 13-07-2009, the fixed deposit is entitled to get 7% quarterly compound interest for the period from 13-07-2009 to 12-07-2010
The fixed deposit amount Rs.5,75,984/- as on 22-12-2000 is entitled to get further increase as per the following table.
Amount | Period | Interest % | Maturity date | Maturity Amount |
From | To |
5,75,984 | 22-12-2000 | 01-08-2006 | 9.4% | 01-08-2006 | 8,79,775.33 |
8,79,775.3 | 01-08-2006 | 13-07-2009 | 9% | 13-07-2009 | 11,44,250.78 |
11,44,250.78 | 13-07-2009 | 12-07-2010 | 7% | 12-07-2010 | 12,26,475.53 |
12,26,475.53 | 12-07-2010 | 12-05-2011 | 7.35% | 12-05-2011 | 13,01,555.99 |
13,01,555.99 | 12-05-2011 | 17-11-2012 | 9.4% | 17-11-2012 | 16,17,753.42 |
16,17,753.42 | 17-11-2014 | 17-11-2015 | 9% | 17-11-2015 | 19,17,644.46 |
19,17,644.46 | 17-11-2015 | 23-07-2016 | 7.75% | 23-07-2016 | 20,19,030.26 |
On 23-07-2016 the maturity value of the fixed deposit would have been amounted to be Rs.20,19,030/-. The complainant was given Rs.16,55,772/- on 23-07-2016 by the first opposite party. The complainant is eligible to get balance amount Rs.3,63,258/- as on 23-07-2016.
On the basis of the above discussed evidence, it is clear that the first opposite party failed to provide the auto renewal of the fixed deposit from 01-08-2006 to 13-07-2009 and further from 13-07-2009 to 12-07-2010 as per the rules and regulations of the Central Bank of India. The second and third opposite parties failed to take action and to sort out the grievance of the complainant on the basis of the complaints Ext.A10 and Ext.A11 submitted before them.
It is clear that the opposite party 1, 2 and 3 failed to provide the eligible interest amount and benefits to the fixed deposit.
Even though the complainant claimed to get benefits on interest for being most valued customer and senior citizen, we are of the opinion that since the fixed deposit was in the name of the Chief Engineer (Civil), KSE Board. The complainant is not eligible to get these benefits.
The act of the opposite parties 1,2 and 3 is deficiency in service on their part. Hence Point No.1 is found in favour of the complainant. The complaint is allowed and we pass the following Orders.
The opposite parties 1,2 and 3 are directed to pay an amount of Rs.3,63,258/- to the complainant with 6% interest from 23-07-2016 till realization.
The Order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this Order..
Pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 18th day of May, 2022
Sri. K.M. Anto, Member Sd/-
Sri. Manulal V.S. President Sd/-
Smt. Bindhu R. Member Sd/-
Appendix
Witness from the side of complainant
Pw1 – P.T. Mathew
Exhibits marked from the side of complainant
A1 – Format of agreement security deposit
A1(a) – Copy of letter dtd.09-06-97 from Central Bank of Poonjar to the Chief Engineer (Civil) KSEB Vyduthi Bhavan, Trichur
A2 – Copy of deposit details dtd.16-07-97 from Central Bank of India, Poonjar
A3 – Letter dtd.23-11-2010 issued by KSEB Pattom to petitioner
A3(a) - Copy of letter No. CECC/RIA/2010/59 dd.20-11-2010
A4 – Letter No. CECC/RIA/2010/68 dtd.18-01-2011
A4(a) – Indemnity letter
A5 – Letter dtd.28-05-2011 from Central Bank of India to the Chief Engineer (Civil construction) South KSEB Vydyuthi bhavan
A6 – Photocopy of MMDC
A7 – Copy of application dtd.12-12-11 by petitioner to the Information Officer, Central Bank of India, Poonjar Branch.
A8 – Letter dtd. nil issued by Central Bank of India, Poonjar Branch to the petitioner.
A9 – Copy of PAN Card (BEGPM1910N)
A10- Copy of letter dtd.03-06-2011 by petitioner to Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Chennai.
A11- Letter dtd.27-09-2011 from petitioner to the General Manager, Central Bank of India, Mumbai – 21.
A12 – Paper cutting of The New Indian Express (page 13) dtd.01-02-2011
A13 – Copy of letter dtd.19-10-12 by petitioner to The Manager, Central Bank of India, Poonjar
A14- Copy of RTI application given by petitioner to 1st opposite party
A14 (a) – Letter No, ARM/COCHRO/2012-13/230 DTD.25-03-12
A14(b) – Circular dtd.25-03-2003
A14© -Reply to the application under RTI Act dtd.16-18-13
A15 –Letter dtd.19-01-13 from petitioner to the Chief Central Information Commissioner
A15(a) – Copy of decision No. CIC/VS/C/2013/000319/05153 of Central Information Commission.
A15(b) – Order No.CO/OPR/GM/2013-14/FAA-1006/Cochin/6 of First Appellate Authority under RTI Act, 2005.
A15(c) – Letter No. CRO/OPR/2013-14/179 dtd.19-12-2013 of Central bank of
India.
A16 – Report dtd.07-05-2013 in The New Indian Express
A16(a) - Printout of RBI penalizes 22 banks.
A17 – Letter No.CO/OPR/RTI-/2015-16/1162 dtd.22-12-2015
A18 – Copy of Order in IA No.306 of 2016 in R.S.A. No.135 of 2016
A18(a) – Copy of Order No. CECC/VB TCR/2011/847 dtd.20-07-2016
A18(b) – Copy of passbook of petitioner
By Order
Assistant Registrar
