Nand Lal Gupta aged 89 years S/o Sh. Assa Ram R/o H. No. B-1- 3063, Gali No. 4, Power House Road, Bathinda.
.... Complainant
Versus
H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., through its President, Depository Services Trade World, A-Wing, Ground Floor, Kamala Mills Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 4000013.
Branch Manager, H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd., Bathinda (Near Bus Stand)
.... Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection
Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President
Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member
Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member
For the Complainant : Sh.Amanpal Singh, counsel for the complainant
For the Opposite parties : Sh. Vinod Garg, counsel for the opposite parties.
O R D E R
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (here-in-after referred to as 'Act'). The complainant was operating Demat account with opposite party No. 2 bearing DP ID No. IN301436 and client ID 10035057 and having saving bank account bearing No. 01871000190931. This Demat account was meant for the transactions in shares. As per statement as on 30th June, 2009, shares of 170 numbers were shown lying in the complainant's account having market value of Rs. 1751/- and vide this account statement, the opposite party No. 2 had intimated the account status as “Suspended for Debit”. When the complainant enquired from opposite party No. 2 regarding reasons of suspension of his account, it demanded some identity documents i.e. Ration Card, PAN Card, Voter Card etc., which were provided by him to opposite party No. 2 in original. The opposite parties have shown the Demat account suspended due to non-submission of PAN document only. Apart from the above identity documents, the complainant is operating saving account bearing No. 01871000190931 with the same bank. Despite repeated requests and visits, the opposite party No. 2 had refused to restore the suspended account. He had also submitted the documents which has been demanded by opposite party No. 2. The Demat account has already been suspended, even then, the opposite party No. 2 is deducting the maintenance charges of the said account half yearly from the saving bank account of the complainant which is the violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the complainant has filed this complaint.
The opposite parties filed their joint written reply and denied that complainant ever inquired about reasons of suspension of Demat account. The opposite parties have never demanded some identity documents rather they have asked for address proof from the complainant vide letter dated 30-07-2008. The opposite parties were never provided any documents in original or in attested form. No such documents/proof has been placed on file either by the complainant. The opposite parties have further denied the fact that account may be suspected only due to non-submission of PAN card. Rather non-submission of PAN card may be one of the reasons for suspension of the account. In the present case, the account has been suspended due to non-submission of address proof. The complainant was having Demat and Saving Accounts with Centurion Bank of Punjab prior to its merger with HDFC Bank Limited. As per KYC norms issued by Reserve Bank of India, the opposite parties may demand address proof from even the existing account holders and in case the same are not submitted, the account may even be closed. The complainant was himself negligent in submitting the required documents.
Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
Arguments heard and written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
The Demat account of the complainant which is meant for transaction in shares was suspended by opposite party No. 2 on the account of non furnishing of the PAN Card document. The complainant is having his saving account bearing No. 01871000190931 with opposite party No. 2. As per statement of account dated 30th June, 2009 Ex. C-2, sent by opposite party No. 2, shares of 170 numbers were shown lying in the account of the complainant having market value of Rs. 1751/- and vide this account statement, opposite party No. 2 had intimated the account status as “Suspended for Debit.”
The learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that opposite party No. 2 had demanded some identity documents i.e. Ration Card, PAN card, Voter Card etc., which were provided by him in original and attested photostat copies were also delivered to opposite party No. 2. According to the instructions contained in the said account statement it has been clarified at Sr. No. 2 that in case the status of account is shown as suspended for debit, the same may be due to non submission of the PAN document only. Despite providing all the documents, the opposite party No. 2 did not restore the account of the complainant. A saving bank account bearing A/c No. 01871000190931 is also being operated by the complainant in the said bank and the complainant had duly supplied the documents to opposite party No. 2 but despite many requests, the opposite party No. 2 has failed to restore the account of the complainant. He further submitted that opposite party No. 2 has suspected the Demat account of the complainant but is still deducting maintenance charges of the said account half yearly from the saving bank account of the complainant.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite parties have argued that under KYC norms laid down by the Reserve Bank of India, every bank has to update the identity proof and residential proof of its customers from time to time. In case the customer does not fulfill these requirements, the account may be closed. For this, he referred Ex. R-4 & Ex. R5. He argued that in the present case, the account has been suspended due to non submission of address proof.
A perusal of Ex. C-2 shows that the main reason for the “suspension for debit” is as mentioned at Sr. No.2 which is reproduced as under :-
“2. Depository Accounts not complied with the PAN requirement have been suspended for Debit. In case the status of your account is shown as “Suspended for Debit”, the same may be due to non submission of the PAN documents.”
The relevant Clauses of Customer Identification Procedure (CIP) of Master Circular -Know Your Customer (KYC) Norms of Reserve Bank of India reads as under :-
“2.4 (a) ...For customers that are natural persons, the banks should obtain sufficient identification data to verify the identity of the customer, his address/location, and also his recent photograph.”
“2.4 (c) Bank should introduce a system of periodical updation of customer identification data (including photograph/s) after the account is opened. The periodicity of such updation should not be less than once in five years in case of low risk category customers and not less than once in two years in case of high and medium risk categories.”
A perusal of Ex. R-10 shows that complainant is operating Demat account w.e.f. 03-03-2000. During the last 10 years, the opposite parties have never raised any demand for any document from the complainant. If for arguments sake, it be admitted that bank wanted to update the identity documents, as per Sr. No. 2 of their own statement of holding as on 30th June, 2009 Ex. C-2, only PAN number is required whereas in the present case, the complainant has submitted all his identity documents to the opposite party No. 2. Moreover, his saving account is being run with the same bank i.e. opposite party No. 2. But, despite this, the opposite parties have suspended his demat account and did not restore the same inspite of his repeated requests.
The opposite parties are also deducting maintenance charges from the saving account of the complainant despite suspension of Demat account. The opposite parties have submitted that the account of the complainant has not been closed. It has been suspended only due to non-submission of address proof. A perusal of letter dated 30th July, 2008 issued to the complainant Ex. R-1 shows that no demand of PAN card has been raised in the list of documents that can be submitted for address proof. Hence, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in suspending the Demat account of the complainant without any sufficient cause.
In the result, this complaint is accepted with Rs 2,000/- as compensation and cost. The opposite parties are directed to restore the Demat account in question and refund the amount of maintenance charges deducted from the saving account of the complainant during the period the Demat account remained suspended by reversing the entry in the saving account of the complainant. The opposite parties are further directed to furnish a detailed account statement to the complainant showing the reverse entries.
The compliance of this order be made within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.
Pronounced
28-01-2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)
President
(Dr. Phulinder Preet)
Member
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
