Haryana

Kurukshetra

222/2018

Seema Singhal - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

R.K.Singhal

18 Oct 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

                                                     Complaint Case No.222 of 2018.

                                                     Date of institution: 15.10.2018.

                                                     Date of decision: 18.10.2019.

 

Seema Singhal wife of Shri Rajesh Kumar Singhal, r/o House No.3, Sector-5, Urban Estate, Kurukshetra.

                                                                    …..…Complainant.

                                        Versus

 

HDFC Bank Ltd. through its Branch Manager, Pipli, District Kurukshetra.

 

….….Opposite Party.

 

Before:      Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.

                   Ms. Neelam, Member.

                   Shri Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member.

       

Present:     Shri R.K. Singhal, Advocate for the complainant.   

                Shri Rajan Chawla, Advocate for the opposite party.

 

ORDER

                This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by complainant Smt. Seema Singhal against the HDFC Bank Ltd., the opposite party.

2.            Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is having a saving bank account bearing No.03021000114159 with the OP and the said account is a preferred account. The account numbers 03021000114869 and 50100052806435 were also added by the OP in the kit of the complainant. At the time of opening the account, the OP had promised that being preferred account, no charges will be levied by the bank and there is no compulsion of keeping any minimum balance. The OP had also promised that there are certain privileges in the preferred account. It is further averred that in account No.03021000114159, the OP had illegally withdrawn Rs.295/- & Rs.1180/- on 27.03.2018; Rs.17.70 each on 23.4.2018 & 21.07.2018 and Rs.885/- on 24.07.2018, total amounting Rs.2395.40, without any intimation/information to her. Similarly, in account No.03021000114869, the OP had illegally withdrawn Rs.531/- on 21.3.2018, Rs.295/-; Rs.1180/- on 27.3.2018 and Rs.17.70 on two occasions i.e. on 23.4.2018 and 21.7.2018, total amounting Rs.2,041.40. It is further averred that in account No.50100052806435, the OP had withdrawn Rs.885/- on 21.7.2018; Rs.17.70 on two occasions i.e. on 23.4.2018 and 21.07.2018, total amounting Rs.920.40P. The OP had no right to withdraw any amount from the saving account of a customer. That OP had withdrawn a total sum of Rs.5357.20 from her bank accounts and OP had committed criminal breach of trust with the complainant. That she had written an application 30.6.2018 requesting the OP to refund the amount withdrawn illegally by OP alongwith interest, but OP had refunded a sum of Rs.3700/-, out of the above said amount on different dates and the amount of Rs.1657.20 is still outstanding, which has not been refunded despite repeated demands and requests. There is great deficiency in service on the part of OP. Hence, this complaint.

3.             Upon notice, the opposite party appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding locus-standi; cause of action; jurisdiction and complaint is bad for mis-joinder & non-joinder of the necessary parties. It is stated that the complainant has suppressed and concealed the true & material facts from this Hon’ble Forum. The complainant got opened the saving bank account bearing No.03021000114159 with OP on 05.04.2004 and at that the time, she was offered to get the benefit of preferred account, if she will maintain minimum balance of Rs.2 lacs in her account or maintain the FDR of Rs.15 lacs and the bank shall not charge any charges on the debit card and other facilities provided to her from time to time for preferred customers. She agreed for all the terms of the preferred account and regularly given all the benefits till June 2017 to all her attached accounts. She not complied with terms & conditions of the preferred account and her minimum balance in S/B account and FDR was not maintained after January 2017. After a long wait of more than 5 months, her account was de-raised from preferred account to non-preferred account due to non-fulfillment of eligibility of preferred account and started to deduct all the charges from the account of complainant from 08.06.2017 as per norms of the bank. It is pertinent to mention here that the bank due to goodwill of gesture, refunded all the charges from time to time on her request, for which she has no legal right. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made.

4.             The complainant tendered her affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A alongwith documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R5 and closed the evidence.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant reiterated all the version of his complaint. He argued that the complainant is having a preferred saving bank account No.03021000114159 with the OP. The account number 03021000114869 and 50100052806435 were also added by the OP in the kit of the complainant. At the time of opening the said account, the OP assured that no charges will be levied by the bank and there is no compulsion of keeping any minimum balance. It is further argued that the OP had withdrawn a total sum of Rs.2395.40 from account No.03021000114159; Rs.2041.40 from the back account No.03021000114159 and Rs.920.40 from account No.03021000114869 on different dates without any intimation of information to the complainant. Thus, the OP had withdrawn a total sum of Rs.5357.20 from her bank accounts. On her written request dated 30.6.2018, the OP had refunded a sum of Rs.3700/-, out of the above said amount on different dates and the amount of Rs.1657.20 is still outstanding. There is great deficiency in service on the part of OP.

7.             On the other hand, learned counsel for OP reiterated all the version of his reply. He argued that at the time of opening the accounts, the complainant was offered to get the benefit of preferred account, if she will maintain minimum balance of Rs.2 lacs in her account or maintain the FDR of Rs.15 lacs, then the bank shall not charge any charges on the debit card and other facilities provided to her from time to time for preferred customers. He further argued that minimum balance in S/B account and FDR was not maintained after January 2017 by the complainant and after a long wait of more than 5 months, her account was de-raised from preferred account to Non-preferred account. Due to goodwill of gesture, the OP bank refunded all the charges from time to time on her request, for which she has no legal right. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP.

8.             Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the dispute between the parties is with regard to the amount of Rs.1657.20 charged by the OP bank from the accounts of the complainant. It is admitted fact by the OP in its reply that from 08.06.2017, the OP bank started deducting the charges from the accounts of the complainant, but due to goodwill of gesture, the OP refunded the charges to the complainant from time to time, for which she has no legal right. However, it is not understandable that if the complainant was no legal right to refund back the amount charged from her by the OP bank due to her fault, then how the OP bank ‘being a Government entity, can refund back Rs.3700/- to the complainant, due to goodwill gesture. Moreover, the OP bank has also failed to produce any documentary proof to establish that on which capacity/ground the OP had not refund back the balance amount of Rs.1657.20 to the complainant. If it is presumed that the complainant failed to comply with the terms & conditions of the preferred account, even then, it was the duty of the OP bank to serve a notice in this regard to the complainant before raising her account from preferred account to Non-preferred account as well as before charging any amount in this regard. But no such notice has been produced by the OP on the case file, issued to the complainant. In these facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the OP bank had illegally deducted the charges from the bank accounts of the complainant and the complainant is entitled to refund the balance amount of Rs.1657.20, as sought for. Hence, the OP is deficient in providing the services to the complainant.

9.             In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint and direct the OP in the following manner:-

1. To refund the amount of Rs.1657.20 to the complainant.
2. To pay Rs.3,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant alongwith litigation expenses.

 

                The OP is further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 30 days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the complainant shall be entitled interest @9% per annum from the date of order till actual payment and the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the OP. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

 

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.: 18.10.2019.                                                  (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Neelam)       

Member                             Member.