| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area (Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016 Case No. 88/2017 Mrs. Jatinder Mehta W/o Col. Anil Mehta (Retd.) D-54, Defence Colony, New Delhi ….Complainant Versus Manager HDFC Bank D-23, Defence Colony New Delhi ….Opposite Party Date of Institution : 09.03.17 Date of Order : 08.08.19 Coram: Ms. Rekha Rani, President Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER - Succinctly put, the complainant Mrs. Jatinder Mehta was having Savings Bank account with the Defence Colony branch of HDFC Bank hereinafter referred to as the OP.
- It is averred that on 27.09.16 the complainant requested OP to close her Savings Bank account. Copy of the acknowledgement for account closure is annexed as Annexure C-1.
- The complainant was informed that within seven days her account will be closed and it will take 3 days to issue a draft of the outstanding proceeds of the account. The complainant visited the bank again on 07.10.2016 wherein she got to know that the account still has not been closed. The complainant again wrote a reminder for immediate closure of her bank account and also issued directions that under no circumstances any operation be allowed. Copy of the said letter is annexed as Annexure C-2.
- It is next averred that the complainant again visited the office of OP on 17.10.16 and 18.10.16 when she was informed that an amount of Rs.26,000/- had been withdrawn from her account fraudulently on 10.10.16. Aggrieved and disappointed with the inefficiency of OP the complainant sent a legal notice to OP. It is further stated that OP bank admitted the lapses on their part and offered to apologize but did not agree to compensate the complainant for the loss suffered. Hence, the present complaint with the prayer to pay to the complainant the balance outstanding in her account as on 27.09.16 alongwith interest. Additionally the complainant seeks Rs.2 lakhs towards mental agony and Rs.50,000/- towards cost of litigation.
- OP resisted the complaint inter-alia admitting that the complainant requested for closure of her saving account vide Combined Account Closure Form on 27.09.16. OP submits that the complainant opted for destruction of the ATM card and unused cheques issued of her own. It is next submitted by the OP that the amount of Rs.26,000/- was withdrawn from Kotak Mahindra Bank ATM at Nehru Place on 10.10.16.
- OP further submits that as the transaction took place from Kotak Mahindra Bank ATM with the debit card which was in possession of the complainant and PIN of debit card is highly confidential, therefore unless the complainant has shared the details/ compromised the PIN number and given the debit card to somebody known to her the amount could not have been withdrawn from the ATM. Hence, denying any deficiency on their part, OP prays for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.
- Rejoinder is filed on behalf of the complainant reiterating the facts of the complaint. Evidence by way of affidavit is filed by the complainant. On the other hand, evidence of Shri Yatin Sehgal, Branch Manager of OP has been filed.
- Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
- Oral arguments of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP are heard.
- Admittedly, the complainant sought to close her Savings Bank account in the OP bank by submitting Combined Account Closure Form to OP on 17.09.2016 which is annexed as Annexure-C with the written statement of the OP. The complainant has filed acknowledgment receipt for account closure which states that ‘the time line for the above account to be closed is seven days’, is annexed as Annexure-C1. After ten days of the request for closure of the Bank Account the complainant visited the OP bank and was surprised to know that despite ten days having passed her account had not been closed. She immediately issued a reminder letter dated 07.10.2016 to the OP bank seeking the closure of her account with directions to not allow any other operation in her account and reiterating that she will collect the draft of the balance amount in her account personally. Copy of the said letter is annexed as Annexure-C2 which is stamped and is duly received by the OP bank.
- The complainant contends that an amount of Rs.26,000/- was withdrawn from her account on 10.10.2016 i.e. after 12 days of putting in her request for closure of her account. No FIR is alleged to have been lodged regarding the same. Moreover, Kotak Mahindra Bank from the ATM whereof the amount was withdrawn has not been impleaded party to the present complaint, which could have provided the CCTV footage as to who withdrew the money. Hence, the complainant has failed to establish the fact that the said transaction was ‘Fraudulent’.
- As regards the destruction of the ATM card and the cheques, after giving a request for account closure till the time account is operational, the complainant was within her rights to operate the same using all legitimate modes provided to her by the Bank i.e. ATM card and cheque book.
- However, complainant has placed on record a ‘Regret Letter’ for the delayed closure of the account issued by OP bank exhibited as Exhibit 5 wherein it is admitted that complainant’s account was closed on 31.10.2016. Therefore, we are of the opinion that OP is guilty of deficiency to the extent that it did not close the account of the complainant within the period of seven days as promised rather the account was closed after 33 days of receiving the request for closure.
- In view of the discussion above, complaint is allowed and OP is directed to compensate the complainant by paying Rs.20,000/- in lumpsum within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Failing which the OP shall become liable to pay interest @ 8% p.a. on the amount awarded till realization.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room. Announced on 06.08.19. | |
