BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Complt. Case No :  880 of  2009

Date of Institution:    24.06.2009

Date of Decision  :    27.10.2010

Suman Bansal wife of Sh.Rajneesh Bansal, R/o H.No.376, Sector 30-A, Chandigarh.

……Complainant

V E R S U S

1]     HDFC Bank Limited, through its Branch Manager, SCO No.371-372, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh.

2]     HDFC Bank Limited, Cards Division No.8, Lattice Bridge Road, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai

.…..Opposite Parties

CORAM:        SH.LAKSHMAN SHARMA                     PRESIDENT

                SH.ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI          MEMBER

                MRS.MADHU MUTNEJA                    MEMBER

PRESENT:    None for the complainant.

Sh.Sandeep Suri, Adv for OPs.

PER MADHU MUTNEJA, MEMBER

                The instant complaint has been filed by Suman Bansal wife of Sh.Rajneesh Bansal,  under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.  The complainant has alleged that the OPs have wrongly put a hold on her account.   

1]             The case made out by the complainant is as under:-

                The complainant had opened a bank account with OP-1.  She was surprised when a sum of Rs.36,943.91 were put on hold from her account to be adjusted against the credit card facility of her husband Sh.Rajneesh Bansal without her prior permission or consent.

                The complainant approached the OPs and requested them to release the amount as she was not concerned with the credit card facility enjoyed by her husband and she does not hold any credit card in her name.  Since the OPs did not comply with this request, the complainant has alleged deficiency in service as per Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.  The complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to credit the above amount in her account and also pay compensation for mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation.  The complainant has attached a copy of the letter dated 23.3.2009 issued by the Bank to her husband demanding payment for the outstanding amount in the credit card account. 

2]             After admission of the complaint, notices were sent to the OPs.

                Both OPs filed joint reply.  In the preliminary objections the OPs have stated that the  saving account in respect of which the dispute has arisen was a joint account in the name of the complainant as well as her husband Sh.Rajneesh Bansal.  The Bank was thus entitled to exercise its right of lien in respect of dues payable to it under the credit card facility availed by Sh.Rajneesh Bansal.  The OPs have further submitted that Sh.Rajneesh Bansal was a chronic and intentional defaulter of the Bank and they have thus rightfully adjusted the amount payable by him under the credit card account from the amount available in the saving bank account.

                A notice dated 23.3.2009 was also issued to Sh.Rajneesh Bansal for making payment.  The Ops have alleged that the complainant has not placed the complete documents regarding this notice on record before this Court.  The OPs have placed on record the bank statement and credit card statements of Sh.Rajneesh Bansal along with reply. 

3]             During the course of proceedings, the case was put up before the Lok Adalat for settlement of dispute.  The OPs placed on record the computerized account statement of the complainant along with her husband.  From the statements, it is evident that the account is joint account and the operating instructions show “either or survivor”.  The credit card application form filed by the complainant’s husband has also been placed on record. 

4]             At the time of arguments, none appeared on behalf of the complainant on 18.10.2010 when the case was fixed for arguments.  We, therefore, proceeded to dispose of this complaint on merits under rule 4(8) of the Chandigarh Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 read with Section 13(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) even in absence of the complainant. 

5]             We have heard the ld.Counsel for the OPs and have also perused the evidence and documents led by the parties in support of their contentions.

6]             It is evident that the complainant and her husband had opened a joint ‘either or survivor’ account with the OPs; though credit card facility was being used only by the husband.  It is also evident from the credit card statements shown that the husband of the complainant was a chronic defaulter and irregular in making payments.  The bank in exercise of this right had placed a lien on the joint account for Rs.36,943.91. 

7]             The OPs have placed on record all relevant documents. Also OPs have placed on record the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Syndicate Bank Vs. Vijay Kuntar wherein the legal termology of Banker’s lien was discussed.  The Hon’ble Apex Court has held that any amount due to the bank can be adjusted from the account of the depositor to discharge the payment due to the bank.

8]             The complainant has not mentioned in her complaint either the bank account number, or the fact that it was a joint account with her husband.  Even in the Photostat documents placed on record by the complainant, the name of the account holder and the account number is not mentioned. 

9]             The documents placed on record by the OPs clearly show that both the complainant and her husband could operate the account, hence the payment against the credit card facility taken by the husband of the complainant against the same account, could be adjusted by the bank against the balance amount lying therein.  The complainant cannot contend that the bank has wrongly put a hold on her account. 

10]            In view of the above, we dismiss this complaint finding no deficiency on the part of OPs

                Certified copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

27^th Oct., 2010                                                            Sd/-

(LAKSHMAN SHARMA)

PRESIDENT

                                                                   Sd/-

                                       (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI)

MEMBER

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                    (MADHU MUTNEJA)

MEMBER

‘Om’