Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/721/2009

M/s Star Exporters and Manufactures - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Parmod Bansal

10 Apr 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

 

                                                                                                Complaint No….721  of 2009.

                                                                                                Date of institution:… 6.8.2009.

                                                                                                Date of decision: 10.4.2015

1. M/s Star Exporters & Manufacturers, a partnership firm through its Partner Smt. Usha Gupta.
2. Smt. Usha Gupta wife of Sh. Sushil Chandra, Partner M/s Star Exporters & Manufacturers through their Authorized person Sh. Sanjay Kumar Gupta, resident of Sapphire Hotel, Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

 

                                                                                                                  …Complainants

                                    Versus

 

1. ICICI Bank ltd. through its Branch Manager, B-VI,1269V, Gobindpuri Road, Model Town, Yamuna Nagar.
2. ICICI Bank Ltd. through its CMD/M.D., ICICI Bank Tower, Bandra- Kurla Complex, Mumbai 400051 India.  

 

 

                                                                                                                    …Opposite parties. 

 

                        Complaint under section 12 of

                        the Consumer Protection Act.

 

CORAM:           SH. A.K.SARDANA PRESIDENT,

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Parmod Bansal, Advocate, counsel for complainant.   

              Sh. M.L.Bansal, Advocate, counsel for OPs.

 

ORDER

 

                        Complainant has filed the present complaint alleging therein that the complainant  No.1 is the partnership firm and Smt. Usha Gupta is one of the partner of the said firm and is competent to file the complaint for herself and on behalf of the firm. The complainant firm is manufacturers and erectors of Sugar, Paper, Cement and chemical machinery, M.S. Structural and Fabrication works and having its Administrative Office at Hotel Sapphire Complex, Station Road, Jagadhri. The Ops are providing banking services to general Public and taking their due charges against the said services and OP No.1 is working at Yamuna Nagar under the control of OP No.2. The complainant firm had opened a current account bearing No. 024705000310 with the OP No.1 for day to day working in August 2005 having its communication address Kothi No. 1, Kalindi Chander Nagar, P.O. Issopur, Yamuna Nagar. Since beginning, the account of the complainant was running properly as per rules and regulations narrated to the complainant by the OP at the time of opening of current account. The OPs illegally started debiting the account of the complainant firm and then the complainant had gone through the statement of account and it was observed that a sum of Rs. 25,505/48 has illegally been debited by the Ops in the account of complainant firm in the following manner:-

 On 24.5.2007                                        Rs. 224.48

On 6.8.2007                                          Rs. 5618.00

On 5.10.2007                                         Rs. 8427.00

On 21.1.2008                                         Rs. 11236.00

As per the record of complainant, the Ops have debited Rs. 73,330/- illegally, unauthorizedly   and arbitrarily on the pretext that the complainant firm has not maintained average quarterly balance of Rs. 5,00,000/- as per norms of platinum current account. Thereafter, on 7.3.2008 the complainant wrote a letter to the OP No.1 stating therein that the abovesaid amount which had been debited illegally be credited in his account as they have never chosen the option that their account be converted to platinum current account from regular standard current account nor given any consent in this regard. As per norms of the OP, in the regular current account the average quarterly balance should be minimum Rs. 10,000/- which had been regularly maintained by the complainant firm. The said letter had been duly received by the Ops and in response to the said letter they sent  an E-mail on 10.3.2008 stating therein that the complainant’s account had been converted in to Platinum Current Account from 1.1.2007 and in reply to said E-mail, the complainant again wrote a letter dated 12.3.2008 stating therein that the complainant has never given the consent to convert the said account as platinum because there was no need for the complainant to take privileges/ benefit of such highly expensive account. The Ops did not pay any heed to the request of complainant and thereafter oral requests, telephonic talks and regular correspondence could not yield any result. The Ops illegally deducted a sum of Rs. 73,330/- from the account of complainant up-to April 2009, then on 14.4.2009, complainant wrote a letter to Ops to close the account of complainant firm and refund the amount of Rs. 73,330/- alongwith interest @24% per annum but the OPs did not pay any heed to the genuine request of the complainant and has thus prayed for directing the OPs to refund the amount of Rs. 73,330/- alongwith interest @ 24% per annum from the date of deduction till its realization and also to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment, financial loss as well as deficient and negligent act of the Ops and also to pay litigation expenses.

2.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel and filed written statement raising preliminary objections that the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the basis of lack of jurisdiction as per Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006, according to which jurisdiction qua any practice of bank or working lies with Banking Ombudsman Act.  The present complaint is also liable to be dismissed as complainant is a commercial establishment and running commercial activities and account of the complainant firm is a current account and the same does not fall within the ambit of consumer as defined in Consumer Protection Act. On merit, it has been urged that there is no deficiency on the part of OP and OP bank is working as per guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. The complainant has availed the facilities of Platinum Account and after availing these services since 2007, has filed this false complaint for wrongful financial gain. The motive of the complainant seems to gain extra benefit after using the services of bank. After passing of two years, this complaint has been filed. In case this firm/complainant has any problem regarding said charges, then said firm should close its account but instead of this, complainant is running its account and waiting for rebate or grab some extra benefits by such false litigation and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

3.                     To prove his case, counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sanjay Kumar Gupta authorized person of complainant No.2 as annexure CX and documents as Annexures C-1 to C-10 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainants whereas on the other hand, counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Vikas, Manager/authorized person, ICICI Bank and documents as Annexures R-1 & R-2 on behalf of OPs and closed their evidence.

4.                     We have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file. The counsel for the complainants argued that the complainant firm had opened a current account bearing No. 024705000310 with the OP No.1 for day to day working in August 2005 and on the perusal of statement of account it was observed that a sum of Rs. 71,330/- has been debited from their account on the pretext that the complainant firm has not maintained Average Quarterly Balance of Rs. 5,00,000/- as per norms of Platinum Current Account. Thereafter the complainant wrote a letter to the OP that the said amount has been debited illegally and the same be credited in his account as they have never chosen the option that their account be converted into Platinum Current Account from Regular Standard Current Account nor given any consent in this regard. As per norms of the OP in the regular current account, the Average Quarterly Balance should be Rs. 10000/- which had been regularly maintained by the complainant firm. 

5.                     On the other hand, the OP bank has stated that they are working under the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India and complainant availed the facilities of Platinum Account and after availing these services since 2007, complainant has filed this false complaint for wrongful financial gain. The motive of the complainant seems to gain extra benefit after using the services of bank. The complainant firm is big firm and running huge commercial activities and well aware about maintaining the account and also aware about functioning of bank policies and never personally approached to the bank and relied upon the case laws titled as Maya Engineering Works vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. decided on 5.11.2014 delivered by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi wherein it has been held that any services hired or availed for commercial purpose after amendment on 15.3.2003 does not fall within the purpose of “Consumer” in the light of order of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 10650 of 2010, Birla Technologies ltd. Vs. neutral Glass and Allied Industries Ltd. Learned counsel for the Op further relied upon the case laws titled as PDC Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. Axis Bank Ltd. III (2013) CPJ page 672 (NC), Suishma Goel vs. Punjab National bank, 2011 (3) CLT page 576 (NC) wherein it has been held that complainant is commercial organization and bank account maintained by complainant is for commercial purpose. The complaint will fall the exception clause contained in section 2(1)(d)(ii) of Consumer Protection Act. Learned counsel for the OP further relied upon the various case laws on the aforesaid point and prayed for dismissal of complaint. 

                        To rebut the aforesaid contention of the OPs, counsel for the complainant submitted that no doubt, the complainant firm is an industrial concern and carrying on business for commercial purposes and have opened the account in the OP Bank but they have hired the services of the OPs not to generate any profit in the business. To support aforesaid version, complainant’s counsel submitted various case laws reported in IV(2013) CPJ 336 (NC) titled as “ Canara Bank and Others Versus Jain Motor Trading Company & Others, wherein it has been held that “ Commercial concerns per se are not excluded from filing complaint under the Act if it does not involve direct generation of profits or resale. OCC facility was sought from bank to help & resolve financial difficulties being faced by respondent which was not per se commercial activity generating profits. Complainant Consumer. The court has upheld the earlier view given in Harsolia Motors Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. I (2005) CPJ 27 NC. Similar views have been taken in a case reported in 2014(2) CLT page 414 titled as Himalaya Hydro Private Limited Hydro Power Project Versus United India Insurance Company ltd. While discussing the issue of commercial purpose-Insurance Policy- Plea of Insurance company that the complainant is a company and cause for hiring the services of the opposite party is commercial and hence the consumer complaint is not maintainable. Held “ not tenable because the insurance policy has not taken for commercial purpose- The activity of complainant may be commercial but the insurance policy is not for the commercial purpose and the same has been taken for indemnification of loss.”

                        From the above, it is manifestly clear that the complainant firm has not opened their account in the bank to earn profit rather hired services during the course of business. The authorities(supra) tendered by OPs are not disputed but not identical to the facts and circumstances of the case whereas the authorities (supra) tendered by the counsel for complainant is fully applicable in the present case. As such, the present complaint is squarely covered under the provisions of CP Act and the complainant firm is consumer and can maintain the present complaint.

                        In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered view that the OP Bank has not tendered any documentary proof to prove that the complainant firm had given any consent for converting their Account as Platinum Current Account from Regular Standard Current Account. Moreover, the complainant has also written a letter dated 7.3.2008 ( Annexure C-1) for wrongly debiting transaction of Rs. 25,505.48 from their account and further confirmed that they will continue to keep their current account as standard current account with Rs. 10,000/- average quarterly balance. The complainant on receipt of e-mail dated 10.3.2008 from OP Bank again wrote a letter dated 12.3.2008 (Annexure C-2) to the OPs questioning as to how they have converted their account into Platinum Current Account from 1.1.2007 for which minimum AQB is to be maintained at Rs. 5,00,000/- and how they can change the nature of account and started charging to debit without getting any consent from complainant and again on 5.2.2009 complainant objected vide letter (Annexure C-3) that the levy of transaction charges is neither authorized by them nor chargeable in their account and this objection has been raised by their Auditors. Lastly, the complainant wrote a letter dated 14.4.2009 (Annexure C-4) to the OP’s Regional Head, ICICI Bank Chandigarh to close their account and to send pay order for Rs. 71330/- with interest at the rate of 24% per annum, so that they may canalize the future transaction through their another account. During the course of arguments, it came to the notice of the Forum that no any statement of account has properly been maintained by the bank during the course of their business as the same has not been produced on the file neither by the complainant nor by OPs and the case was adjourned to 26.11.2014 by directing the Branch Manager of ICICI Bank to submit the statement of account from the date of opening of concerned account i.e. w.e.f. 2.8.2005 to till the closure of the account and Sh. Vikas Matolia Branch Manager, ICICI Yamuna Nagar appeared with the statement of account from 21.4.2008 to till the closure of account and submitted explanation for not submitting the requisite statement w.e.f. 2.8.2005 with the pretext that the same is not available at Yamuna Nagar rather can be taken from head office Mumbai and requested for some time for submitting the same and thereafter the counsel for OPs tendered the statement of account on 23.12.2014.  In the statement of account for the period from 2.8.2005 to 31.3.2008 (marked by Forum as Annexure ‘A’), it has not been mentioned that the complainant is an account holder of Platinum Account and thus the OPs have failed to furnish any record regarding consent given by the complainant for change of their account from Regular Standard Current Account to Platinum Account. Thus, they are admittedly deficient in providing proper services to the complainant firm and are also guilty of committing unfair trade practice by wrongly debiting an amount of Rs. 71,330/- in the account of complainant firm. Hence, in these circumstances, we have no option except to allow the present complaint and therefore, we direct the OPs bank to comply with the following directions within 30 days from the communication of this order:-

1. To refund an amount of Rs. 71,330/- to the complainant firm alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of institution of complaint to the date of decision.
2. To pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation on account of litigation expenses harassment & mental agony etc. caused to the complainant for a long period of more than 5 years (i.e. from the date of filing of complaint to till the date of decision) by the negligent act of the insurance company.
3. To further pay Rs. 10,000/- as punitive damages on account of unfair trade practice committed by OP Bank by wrongly deducting of Rs. 71,330/- as transaction charges on account of converting their account from regular standard current account to Platinum Current Account.

                  The aforesaid directions must be complied with by the OP-Bank within the stipulated period otherwise all the aforesaid awarded amounts shall fetch further simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default. The complaint is decided accordingly in the above terms. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced:10.4.2015

 

                                                                                                (A.K.SARDANA)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                          (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                           MEMBER