O R D E R
K.S. MOHI, PRESIDENT
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant had an saving bank account bearing No.629501505245, with the O.P bank. It is alleged that complainant had deposited a sum Rs.5,000/- by cash in his account in the bank of O.P. It is further alleged that the complainant had issued a cheque bearing No.803039 dated 25.03.2007 for a sum of Rs.5,000/- in favour of Arbitrator Law Reporter. It is alleged that the complainant was surprised and shocked that the said cheque was dishonoured by the O.P on 28.03.2007 with the remarks “Insufficient Funds.” It is further alleged that the O.P had illegally deducted a sum of Rs.111/- from account of the complainant on 27.03.2007 for the charges of ATM card. Therefore the amount of the complainant in his savings account become lesser than the cheque amount, the issued cheque by the complainant was returned unpaid. It is alleged that again the O.P had deducted a sum of Rs.224/- on 28.03.2007 on account of cheque dishonoured charges. The complainant has also sent a legal notice dated 10.04.2007 but to no avail. On these facts complainant prays that O.P be directed to pay/return total amount of Rs.335/- and also to pay cost and compensation as claimed.
2. O.P appeared and filed the written statement. In its written statement OP has not disputed that complainant had an saving bank account bearing No. 629501505245, with the O.P bank. It is alleged that the deduction of Rs.111/- was due to annual charges of the debit card pertaining to the said account. It is further alleged that the deduction of the said charges was according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the kit which was supplied to the complainant and accordingly the complainant had agreed to pay all the legal charges which are levied from time to time. It is denied that the O.P illegally deducted a sum of Rs.224/- on 28.03.2007 on account of the cheque dishonoured charges. It is alleged that the said deduction was made as per the law. It is further alleged that the dishonor of the said cheque happened due to the mistake of the complainant himself. Dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
3. Complainant has filed rejoinder reiterating all the facts as mentioned in the complaint. He has also filed his affidavit affirming the facts alleged in the complaint. On the other hand Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Sr. Manager (Legal) of O.P Bank has already filed affidavit in evidence on behalf of O.P Bank.
4. We have carefully gone through the record of the case and also heard submissions of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for the O.P.
5. In the instant case the first question involved is as to whether the deduction of Rs.111/- towards annual charges of debit/ credit card and subsequently deduction of Rs.224/- on account of cheque dishonoured charges by O.P was justified or not. Admittedly, the complainant was holding bank account with O.P with zero balance account and with no charges in terms of ATM card. However, on 26.03.2007 the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.5,000/- by cash in his account and had issued cheque No.803039 dated 25.03.2007 in favour of Arbitration Law Reporter which was dishonoured on 28.03.2007 with remarks “Insufficient Fund”. In fact the deduction of Rs.111/- from the bank account of the complainant led to dishonor of the cheque. Now the question arises is as to whether the deduction of Rs.111/- towards ATM card charges was justified or not. The counsel for the complainant vehemently stressed that he opened the account was zero balance and he was not aware of levying of any ATM charges, therefore, there was deficiency in service on the part of the O.P by dishonouring the cheque. The counsel for the O.P, on the other hand, submitted that the bank opening form clearly indicates that O.P was entitled to charge annual fee on account of use of Debit card. I have seen form 60/ 61 dated 12.04.2005. The term pertaining to levy of annual charges of ATM card are written in such a manner that no one can read the same without the assistance of microscope. In fact the innocent such like endeavour on the part of financial institution is to hoodwink customers and thus is tantamount to unfair practice. Besides this though the complainant was holding bank account with the O.P since 2005 but O.P ventured to deduct the ATM annual charges only in 2007 without any prior notice to the complainant. There is no explanation on the part of O.P as to why it did not deduct such amount towards ATM during preceding years. The deduction of Rs.111/- and subsequently a sum of Rs.224/- on account of cheque dishonour by O.P amounted to deficiency in service. Needless to say that it also lowered the prestige of the complainant who is a practicing lawyer of his client.
6. We, therefore, direct the O.P to pay a sum of Rs.335/- with interest @ 6% from the date institution of the complaint till payment, the further award of Rs.10,000/- towards harassment mental agony loss of time.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced this 23rd day of March, 2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
