Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that op no.1 is the Banking Financial Institution and the op no.2 is the registered office of the op no.1 and op no.2 supervise and control each and every act, work and deed of op no.1 whereas complainant is a customer of op no.1 HDFC Bank Ltd., Dalhousie Clive Row Branch is within the jurisdiction of Hare Street Police Station.

          Fact remains that complainant took loan from various companies namely TATA Capital Financial Services Ltd. under Loan A/C No. 3425329, Capital First Ltd. under Loan A/C No. 1295067, HDB Financial Services Ltd. under Loan A/C No. 314425, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. under Loan A/C No. CSG 80803837, Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. under Loan A/C No. CDKLKTF1212300003 and HDFC Bank Ltd. under Loan A/c No. 22241338 and for repayment of the said loan the complainant opted for Electronic Clearance System (ECS) mandate and accordingly issued debit instructions to the op no.1 to clear the EMIs of the respective parties against the aforesaid loan accounts from his said current account on monthly basis.

          In due course it reveals that there were various irregularities and illegalities in the said loan accounts, as such discrepancies and disputes arose between the complainant and the said finance companies from which the complainant took loan for which complainant compelled to withdraw the mandate/ECS debit instruction from the op no.1 in connection with current account under reference by serving a letter dated 21.03.2014 to the op no.1 on 22.03.2014 duly acknowledged the same by the op no.1 after verifying its contents.

          Inspite of withdrawing the mandate/ECS debit instruction by the complainant from the op no.1 in connection with said current account, the op no.1 debited the amount of Rs. 71,408.45 paisa on 31.03.2014 in favour of HDFC Bank Ltd. and a sum of Rs. 33,400/- on 02.04.2014 in favour of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., and a sum of Rs. 45,500/- on 03.04.2014 in favour of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd.

          After intimation of the withdrawal of mandate/ECS debit instruction the op no.1 intentionally and illegally and arbitrarily allowed the said ECS in the current account under reference and debited a total amount of Rs. 1,50,308.45 paisa from the account of the complainant in favour of the three respective parties though the ECS withdrawal letter dated 21.03.2014 was served upon the op no.1 on 22.03.2014 and op duly received and acknowledged the same after verifying the contents of the same.

          The procedural guidelines-ECS (Debit) of Reserve Bank of India Sl. No. V (b) states that the destination branches can debit their customers’ account only on the basis of the mandates given to them.  The account holder/customer is also entitled to withdraw the mandate/ECS Debit Instructions from his/her banker without involvement of the user instruction.  The withdrawal instructions of a customer in such cases would be treated equivalent to a “Stop Payment” instruction in cheque clearing system.  The destination bank branches would provide such withdrawal of mandate information to the users on request.  Thereafter the user institution shall stop including the relative transaction in the ECS file, after receipt of such countermand by the customer.

          Even after existing such provision of RBI, the op violated the procedural guideline- ECS (Debit) of Reserve Bank of India that caused huge financial irreparable loss, injury, physical harassment and mental agony to the complainant and in the above circumstances, complainant repeatedly asked the op no.1 to credit the amount of Rs. 1,50,308.45 paisa into his bank account but that was not done which is completely illegal and it is no doubt negligent and deficient manner of service of the op for which complainant suffered and ultimately has prayed for redressal.

          On the other hand HDFC Bank by filing written statement submitted that complainant has not appeared before this Forum with clean hands and the complaint bears no merit in the eye of law because complainant suppressed the materials regulations of Reserve Bank of India also and it is admitted that complainant by a letter dated 21.03.2014 through hand delivery by one of the employees of the complainant with instructions to ‘Stop Payment’ of all cheques and the ECS in the account No. 101523200873 and that letter was received by the op no.1 on 22.03.2014.

          Immediately on receipt of that letter on 22.03.2014 op no.1 along with a forwarding letter dated 22.03.2014 handed over a form for ECS Debit Mandate Cancellation Form to the employee of the complainant who came to deposit the letter dated 22.03.2014.  Though ECS Debit Mandate Cancellation Form was handed over to the employee of the complainant and it was particularly mentioned in the letter dated 22.03.2014 the reasons for inability towards making stop payment of the ECS Debit Mandate due to absence of pre-specified format and the complainant was requested to submit the duly signed completed format since the copy of ECS mandate cancellation request has to be acknowledged by the Utility Company and the requirement of submitting the filled in form for making stop payment of the ECS Debit Mandate was mandatorily required for stop payment of ECS.  But complainant failed and neglected to submit the required Form for stop payment of ECS.  So, there was no laches on the part of the op since the copy of ECS Mandate Cancellation request has to be acknowledged by the Utility Company.

          Complainant has or had his knowledge to submit the form and just for wrongful gain and with a malafide intention did not submit the same and even suppressed the said fact before this Forum and it was intimated to the op that stop payment would be effected in ECS only after submitting the required form and the submission of the required form was mandatory which was never submitted before the op no.1 even after receipt of the same since the copy of ECS mandate cancellation request has to be acknowledged by the Utility Company and for which stop payment through ECS could not be activated.

          Further op no.1 has submitted that they have not violated the terms and conditions, procedure of guidelines by the Reserve Bank of India in respect of ECS (Debit) and question of crediting Rs. 1,50.308.45 paisa does not arise because complainant has not suffered any loss, so the entire complaint is false, fabricated and for which the complaint should be dismissed.

Decision with reasons

          On over all evaluation of the complaint including written version and also considering the argument of the complainant himself including the Ld. Lawyer for the op and further considering the fact that complainant took loan from different companies and that is admitted by the complainant.  It is also admitted by the complainant that at the time of taking loan, he submitted ECS Mandate Cancellation to the Utility Company and also to the fact for payment of EMIs against loan taken by the complainant from different companies.

          Fact remains that complainant did not submit the letter dated 21.03.2014 to the op bank on 22.03.2014.  But it was delivered by one employee of the complainant and it was received by the op no.1 on 22.03.2014 and necessary documents were supplied to that employee for delivery the same for stop payment of all cheques and ECS in the A/c No. 101523200873.  At the time of hearing the argument, complainant was asked whether he submitted such form as supplied by the bank to his employee or not.  Complainant submitted that he was not aware of the fact and he did not file such filled up form as per banking rules.  But complainant submitted that there is no such rule to submit such form in writing and any format and no such form was supplied to the complainant.  But anyhow complainant has not denied the assertion of the op as made in written version at page-3, Para-C.

          Another factor is that complainant has pointed out one provision of the RBI guideline regarding ECS Mandate.  It is also proved from the letter dated 02.03.2014 issued by the op/Bank that though unable to accept the request for stop presentation of the ‘Standing Instruction’ and ‘Security Cheque’ towards future repayment of the said Loan Account for non-submission of the format as required by the bank for sending their same to the Utility Company, it was not activated.

          Truth is that complainant against that did not utter any word before this Forum.  At the same time it is clear that the said Mandate Form is mandatory as per procedural guideline cum ECS Debit issued by the Reserve Bank of India.  Truth is that op handed over the said form along the letter of the complainant’s employee but on the very date on receipt of the letter by the op no.1 on 22.03.2014.  But complainant did not submit the same.  So, considering that fact, it is clear that there was no laches on the part of the ops for not accepting such prayer as written by the complainant in handwriting in a simple letter.

          Fact remains that the format is part of the RBI Rules which is annexed with Annexure-2.  But complainant’s Ld. Lawyer of complainant only produced the portion of the said regulation but bank has produced all papers wherefrom it is found that complainant suppressed the fact that he did not submit said format.  At the same time it is found that complainant is a private limited company and Hemant Murarka is the Director and account is current account, transaction is for business purpose and at the same time complainant has not complied the mandate of the op for submitting such prayer for withdrawal of ECS mandate.  Though complainant’s employee received that form along with letter dated 22.03.2014 Annexure-B.

          Truth is that ECS (Debit) Mandate Cancellation Form is part of Annexure-1 of the RBI guidelines.  So, considering that fact it is clear that complainant as a commercial business company took facility of current account from the op and took several loans from different financial institutions and as per agreement with the financial institution, complainant filed such ECS Mandate to Utility Company accordingly submitted cheques.

          In fact only three cheques were cleared as produced by financial institution and invariably it was first EMI.  So, complainant’s commercial company has not suffered from any loss or damage on the contrary the figure of loan account has been decreased and the amount has not been misused.  So, under any circumstances, complainant cannot get benefit from the op in view of the fact that op/bank as per guideline of the RBI supplied all materials to file but complainant did not submit it and appeared before this Forum to get benefit in respect of current account and the transaction is commercial but not personal nor domestic transaction.  In view of the above fact and circumstances, we are convinced to hold that this complaint was filed by the complainant falsely against the op and complainant is a private company and transaction is commercial in nature against payment of loan and truth is that he did not file any Annexure-1 in respect of ECS (Debit) Mandate Cancellation Form as per RBI guideline for which the entire case is false, fabricated and it was filed by a company and for which invariably only for the purpose of deceiving the Utility Company and without paying any loan amount of six financial institutions wherefrom complainant took loan.  The entire approach of the present complainant the private company is immoral, unwanted and no doubt dishonest in nature.

          In the result, the complaint fails as same is vexatious, false and fabricated.

Hence, it is

ORDERED

          That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the ops but considering the conduct of the complainant and for filing vexatious complaint, the complainant is directed to pay penal cost of Rs. 10,000/- which shall be deposited to this to this Forum within 15 days failing which penal action shall be started against the complainant and further fine and penalty shall be imposed against them.