District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 105/2022.
Date of Institution:24.02.2022.
Date of Order:12.04.2023.
Viraj Aggarwal son of Shri Shiv Kumar Aggarwal, resident of House No.1GH/30, NIT-1, Faridabad, District Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
DCB Bank, Branck C-28, Nehru Enclave, Kalkaji, Outer Ring Road, new Delhi – 110 019 through its Branch Head/principal Officer.
…Opposite party
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh.Rajpal Singh, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Nishant Ahmed , counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant deposited money and obtained a FDR bearing account No. 07025200100100915 for Rs.5,61,161/- on 27.02.2018 for 12 months i.e upto 27.02.2019 and maturity
amount was Rs.6,01,485/- and interest agreed @ 7% p.a. On maturity the complainant approached the opposite party to get the said FDR encashed but the opposite party firstly avoided the matter on one pretext or the other and made lame excuse that there was lien mark on the said FDR. Whereas the complainant neither availed any loan from the opposite party nor there was any debts liability was existing against the complainant. The complainant demanded the details and documents regarding alleged lien but the opposite party had not provided the same and the opposite party withheld the said amount of FDR illegally and unlawfully. The complainant had visited several times to the officers of the opposite party but the opposite party was not paying the amount of FDR to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant had legal right to receive the amount of the FDR mentioned above. Thus the complainant was consumer because he had been entitled to receive the amount lying deposited under FDR. The complainant sent legal notice dated 22.12.2021 to the opposite party through registered post but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) make the payment of the sum matured with interest @ 18% p.a. of the said amount from the date of maturity till the date paid to the complainant..
b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 22,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted
that the complainant approached the opposite party bank for availing fixed deposit services, in respect of which the complainant deposited Rs.5,61,161/- and obtained a FDR bearing account NO. 07025200100915 dated 27.02.2018 for a period of 12 months upto 27.02.2019. The maturity amount of the Fixed Deposit was Rs.6,01,485/- at an interest of 7% p.a. The complainant was the proprietor of M/s. Janta Engineers & company (Iron), which entered into a contract with Oil & natural Gas Corporation Limited vide letter of award dated 01.12.2016 bearing No. MR/URN/28/C/CC/80-p) Replacement Buffer solution Tank T1701/UP1BC16006/2016-17. A demand draft of Rs.6,50,000/- was issued by M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) in favour of ONGC Limited by way of security deposit against execution of work assigned. Due to reasons best known to M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) and ONGC Limited, the contract was terminated as per termination order dated 08.03.2019 and the security deposit of Rs.6,50,000/- was forfeited by ONGC. Due to reasons best known to ONGC instead of forfeiting, the amount of Rs.6,50,000/-, it was wrongly released in the favour of M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) in the account No. 07021900011316 maintained with DCB Bank Limited, Faridabad. The complaint was filed by ONGC Limited at Uran Police Station on 23.04.2019 requesting the opposite party-DCB Bank Limited to mark lien on the accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) and its proprietor. Thereafter Sr. Police Inspector of Uran Police Station had sent letters dated 26.04.2019 and 04.05.2019 directing the opposite party bank to mark lien (as per Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act) and freeze the amount of Rs.6,50,000/- in the accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) and its proprietor. As per the directions of Sr. Police Inspector of Urban Police Station, DCB Bank Limited had marked freeze on the following bank accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & company (Iron) and of the complainant:-
S.No. | Account No. | Type of account | Name of the account holder | Balance in the accounts (in Rs.) |
1. | 07021900011316 | Current account | M/s Janta Engineers and company (Iron) | 25,000/- |
2. | 07012900005081 | Saving account | Viraj Aggarwal | 4903.33/- |
3. | 07025200100915 | Saving Account | Viraj Aggarwal | 6,18,471/- |
| | | Total | 6,48,374.33 |
The ONGC Limited has instituted a Special Civil suit bearing No. 112/2020 before Hon’ble Civil Judge Senior Division at Panvel, Dist. Raigad (Maharashtra) against M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) through Mr. Viraj AggarwaL and 2 others, primarily praying for remittance of decretal amount of Rs.6,50,000/-by Defendant No.1 (M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) through Mr. Viraj Aggarwal) in favour of plantifif and inter alia praying that (i) directions be given to defendant NO.2 (the opposite party bank) to remit the lien marked amount of Rs.6,26,993/- in faovur of plaintiff therein (ONGC Limited), (ii) Defendant No.2 (opposite party Bank) be restrained from releasing the amount under lien till the decretal amount was paid by defendant No.1 (iii) an ad-interim order be passed temporarily restraining defendant No.2 from removing lien marked on the account still the final disposal of the suit. It was submitted by the opposite party bank that the aforesaid Special Civil suit was sub judice. Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–DCB Bank. with the prayer to: a) make the payment of the sum matured with interest @ 18% p.a. of the said amount from the date of maturity till the date paid to the complainant. b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 22,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Viraj Aggarwal, Ex.C-1 – Deposit Confirmation advice, Ex.C-2 – legal notice, Ex,C-3 – letter dated 19th January 2022,m, Ex.C-4 – payment details
After availing five effective opportunities, evidence on behalf of opposite party not filed. Hence, evidence on behalf of opposite party was hereby closed by court order vide order dated 06.01.2023.
6. Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant deposited money and obtained a FDR bearing account No. 07025200100100915 for Rs.5,61,161/- on 27.02.2018 for 12 months i.e upto 27.02.2019 and maturity amount was Rs.6,01,485/- and interest agreed @ 7% p.a. vide Ex.C-1, On maturity the complainant approached the opposite party to get the said FDR encashed but the opposite party firstly avoided the matter on one pretext or the other and made lame excuse that there was lien mark on the said FDR. The complainant neither availed any loan from the opposite party nor there was any debts liability was existing against the complainant. The complainant demanded the details and documents regarding alleged lien but the opposite party had not provided the same and the opposite party withheld the said amount of FDR illegally and unlawfully. The complainant had visited several times to the officers of the opposite party but the opposite party was not paying the amount of FDR to the complainant which amounts to deficiency in service. The complainant had legal right to receive the amount of the FDR mentioned above.
On the other hand, counsel for the opposite party argued that the complaint was filed by ONGC Limited at Uran Police Station on 23.04.2019 requesting the opposite party-DCB Bank Limited to mark lien on the accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) and its proprietor. Thereafter Sr. Police Inspector of Uran Police Station had sent letters dated 26.04.2019 and 04.05.2019 directing the opposite party bank to mark lien (as per Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act) and freeze the amount of Rs.6,50,000/- in the accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & Company (Iron) and its proprietor. As per the directions of Sr. Police Inspector of Urban Police Station, DCB Bank Limited had marked freeze on the following bank accounts of M/s. Janta Engineers & company (Iron) and of the complainant:-
S.No. | Account No. | Type of account | Name of the account holder | Balance in the accounts (in Rs.) |
1. | 07021900011316 | Current account | M/s Janta Engineers and company (Iron) | 25,000/- |
2. | 07012900005081 | Saving account | Viraj Aggarwal | 4903.33/- |
3. | 07025200100915 | Saving Account | Viraj Aggarwal | 6,18,471/- |
| | | Total | 6,48,374.33 |
7. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed and opposite party is directed to issue the FDR against the surety bond. Opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment alognwith Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 12.04.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
