THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR

Consumer Complaint No. 526 of 2014

Date of Institution : 29.9.2014

Date of Decision : 6.11.2015

Hardeep Singh, Advocate age about 40 years son of S. Mohan Singh Resident of House No. 1-A, New Dashmesh Avenue, Opposite Khalsa College, Amritsar

...Complainant

Vs.

The ICICI Bank Limited, a Banking Company Incorporated under the Companies Act 1956 having its Corporate Office at The ICICI Towers, Banra Kurla Complex, Mumbai service through its Branch Office at Outside Khalsa College, G.T. Road, Amritsar through its Branch Manager

....Opp.party

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present : For the complainant : In person

For the opposite party : Sh.S.K.Vyas,Advocate

Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member

Sh. Anoop Sharma, Member

Order dictated by :-

Bhupinder Singh, President

-2-

1 Present complaint has been filed by Hardeep Singh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that complainant has saving bank account No.006601521329 with the opposite party bank branch office outside Khalsa College,G.T. Road, Amritsar. The complainant has also two FDR accounts bearing No. 055414003902 and 055414003923 for Rs. 49,292/- each and two recurring deposit accounts bearing No. 055425000186 for Rs. 5000/- per month having a balance of about 2 lacs and 0055425000535 for Rs. 3500/- per month having a balance of about Rs. 25,500/- . In nutshell the total amount of the complainant lying deposited with the opposite party bank is nearly Rs. 3,38,800/-. According to the complainant, he never defaulted in any of the accounts or any terms and conditions of the agreement/contract between the complainant and the opposite party. Complainant has alleged that opposite party bank has imposed certain stern conditions with higher rate of charges for services in comparison to the Nationalized Bank, the details of which is as under :-

1. Average quarterly balance in Nationalized Banks is Rs. 1000/- for Urban areas, whereas in the ICICI Bank same is Rs. 10000/-

2. The penalty for non maintenance of Average quarterly balance in Nationalized Banks is Rs. 50/- only per quarter, whereas in the ICIC Bank same is Rs. 650/-.

3. The penalty for dishonour of cheque on account of insufficiency of funds in

   1. -3-

   Nationalized Banks is Rs. 120/-, whereas in the ICICI Bank same is Rs. 350/-.

4. The peanlty for non deposit of one installment of Recurring deposit account is Rs. 50/- per only whereas in the ICICI Bank same is Rs. 600/-.

5. The charges for issuance of extra cheque book, demand draft, premature closure of fixed deposits and recurring deposits accounts are much higher in comparison to the Nationalized Banks.

Complainant has alleged that opposite party bank branch Khalsa College is in-efficient towards the services to the customers. On 23.8.2014 at 9.45 a.m, the complainant visited the said Khalsa College branch bank to withdraw amount of Rs. 25000/- from his saving account No. 006601521329, to open a new RD account and for the renewal of his fixed deposit having account No. 055414003902. On reaching the branch, the cashier was found absent and when the complainant asked the staff members about his whereabouts, he was told that she was busy and in the cabin of the branch manager. When the cashier did not turn up despite he waited for 10 minutes, the complainant approached the person sitting inside the manager room. When the complainant complained to him about the non availability of any of the required service by him, his only pretext was that network was not working and he cannot do anything. When the manager was requested to provide the complaint book, he lost his temper and started behaving like an inmate of

-4-

mental asylum and shouted at the complainant to do whatever he wanted to do . The complainant was stunned at his baboon like antics and behaviour . On the same day complainant made a complaint to the Managing Director as well as customer care department of ICICI Bank through e-mail to apprise them about the happening at the Khalsa College branch. On 28.8.2014 complainant received reply through e-mail, who apologized for the inconvenience and assured to provide good service in future but did not disclose about the action being taken against the branch manager for his behaviour. However, on 25.9.2014 complainant received a letter dated 24.9.2014 signed by the branch manager requiring him to close all of his accounts within 30 days from the issuance of the letter and to visit the branch for the completion of closure formalities. It was further threatened by him that in the event of the complainant did not close his accounts, the ICICI bank would unilaterally and forcibly close all of his accounts. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service, complaint was filed seeking directions that the opposite party be restrained from unilaterally and forcibly closing the savings as well as fixed deposits and recurring deposit accounts . Compensation of Rs. 50,000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that on 23.8.2014 the branch network was down . After various attempts to restore the network, the branch lodged a service request to network team at

-5-

Mumbai. As it was Saturday and public dealing was upto 2.00 p.m only. It was instructed to staff to inform customers while accepting cash that credits in account would happen only after restoration of network and if there was urgency, customer was to be diverted to other branches. It was submitted that complainant came to branch at 9.48 a.m. Cashier Varinder Kaur attended the comdplainant and while accepting the request, she informed the complainant that branch network was down, so request could be processed later. She also advised him to visit nearby ATM to withdraw cash. However, complainant again came to the branch at 10.10 a.m and Varinder Kaur expressed her inability to procees his request. The complainant was so angy and came to branch manager's cabin and demanded complaint book. The branch manager was busy on phone with network team, Mumbai to restore/resolve the network issue. The branch manager offered seat to the complainant and requested him to wait for a while but he started shouting .The branch manager then dropped the call to attend him and asked the complainant about his problem. But the complainant insisted to provide complaint book. The branch manager requested the complainant that he was there to resolve the issue. The complainant then shouted that the ATMs are always out of service, the branch network remains down, then put a lock on branch shutter and paint the slogan “Khyal Aapka :black”. The other staff as well as Mr. Avtar Singh,Sales Manager of the opposite party bank also tried to pacify the complainant but complainant was

-6-

not ready to listen and shouted that he would lodge complaint to Sr. Management and the branch staff as well as the manager should be ready for consequences and all these scenes were captured by branch camera. The complainant stayed in branch manager's cabin for 3 minutes approximaely and his total stay in the 2^nd visit was for 6 minutes only and it is not fair to determine the behaviour of the entire staff as well as manager of the opposite party bank within such a short span of time. Rather the complainant misbehaved with the branch manager as well as staff including lady staff of the bank branch. It was admitted that in reply to the e-mail sent by the complainant, the managing Director and Customer Care Department also apologized for the inconvenience and assured to provide good services in future. But the complainant was not satisfied and continued to impose his biased attitude for punishing the branch manager without his fault. As such vide letter dated 25.9.2014, complainant was informed that since he was not satisfied with the services of the bank, he should close his accounts with the branch within 30 days from the issuance of said letter and to visit the branch for the completion of closure formalities. But instead of complying with the same, complainant has filed the present complaint. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-7.

-7-

4. Opposite party tendered affidavit of Sh. Neeraj Sharma, Branch Manager Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP6.

5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the complainant and the ld.counsel for the opposite party and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the complainant and the ld.counsel for the opposite party.

6. From the record i.e.pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant has saving bank account No.006601521329 with the opposite party bank branch office outside Khalsa College,G.T. Road, Amritsar. The complainant has also two FDR accounts and two recurring deposit accounts as stated above in the pleadings/complaint. In nutshell the total amount of the complainant lying deposited with the opposite party bank is nearly Rs. 3,38,800/-. The complainant has never defaulted in any of the accounts or any terms and conditions of the agreement/contract between the complainant and the opposite party. The complainant alleges that opposite party bank has imposed certain stern conditions with higher rate of charges for services in comparison to the Nationalized Bank. The complainant alleges that opposite party bank branch Khalsa College is in-efficient towards the services to the customers. The officials of the opposite party bank caused inconvenience, harassment to the customers and are deficient in service. They do not provide proper services to the

-8-

customers and many a times the officials or branch manager of the opposite party bank remains on leave. The officials of the opposite party bank do not co-operate with the customers. Whenever the complainant requested the manager to povide the complaint book of the branch, so that the complainant could lodge his complaint, the manager lost his temper and started misbehaving with the complainant. The complainant also made complaint to the Managing Director as well as Customer Care Department of the opposite party bank through e-mail and he received reply vide which the management of the opposite party bank apologized for the inconvenience, if any, suffered by the complainant and assured to provide good service in future. But they did not take any action against the branch manager and other staff. The said correspondence through e-mails is Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-6. The complainant received letter dated 24.9.2014 Ex.C-7 from the opposite party bank requiring the complainant to close all his accounts within 30 days from the issuance of the letter and to visit the branch for the completion of closure formalities. The complainant was further threatened that in the event of the complainant did not close his accounts, opposite party bank would unilaterally close all his accounts and the opposite party bank or its officials shall not be liable or responsible for any loss that may occur to the comlainant as a result of the same. The complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant which is highly unprofessional and illegal for the

-9-

opposite party.

7. Whereas the case of the opposite party is that it is always the endeavour of the opposite party bank to give best possible services to the customers including the complainant and the opposite party bank tried to provide best services to the complainant. However, behaviour of the complainant towards the staff of the opposite party bank was very cruel as is evident from the language he has used in the complaint itself. He addressed the manager of the opposite party bank as an inmate of mental asylum and further stated that his behaviour was very rude. The manager behaved like baboon like antics. He further stated that how could that person whose behaviour was worse than a peon be the manager of the bank branch. He further stated that the employees of the opposie party bank have qualities like indifferent attitude, deaf ears, incourtesy, inefficiency, impatience and impoliteness. He called the officials as well as the manager of the opposite party bank as stupid, shameless and senseless staff. Opposite party bank further submitted that on 23.8.2014 the branch network was down. After various attempts to restore the network the branch lodged a service request to network team at Mumbai to restore the primary or secondary (temporary) network and it was instructed to the staff to inform the customers while accepting cash that credits in their account would happen only after restoration of network and if there was urgency, customer was to be diverted to other branches. At 9.50 a.m empoloyee

-10-

Varinder Kaur branch cashier attended the complainant. She infomed the complainant that branch network was down, so his request could be processed later on. She also advised him to visit nearby ATM if he had urgency to withdraw the cash. The complainant then left branch and again came to the branch at 10.10 a.m and again employee Varinder Kaur expressed her inability to process the request as network was not restored till then. The complainant became angy and came to the branch manager's cabin and demanded complaint book. The branch manager was busy on phone with network team, Mumbai to restore/resolve the network issue. The branch manager offered seat to the complainant and requested him to wait for a while but he started shouting .The branch manager then dropped the call to attend him and asked the complainant about his problem. But the complainant insisted to provide complaint book. The branch manager requested the complainant that he was there to resolve the issue. The complainant then shouted that the ATMs were always out of service, the branch network remains down, then put a lock on branch shutter and paint the slogan “Khyal Aapka :black”. The other staff as well as Mr. Avtar Singh,Sales Manager of the opposite party bank who was incidently there, tried to pacify the complainant but complainant was not ready to listen and shouted that he would lodge complaint to Sr. Management and the branch staff as well as the manager should be ready for consequences and all these scenes were captured by branch camera. The complainant stayed in branch manager's cabin for 3 minutes

-11-

approximaely and his total stay in the 2^nd visit was for 6 minutes only and it is not fair to determine the behaviour of the entire staff as well as manager of the opposite party bank within such a short span of time. Not only this the complainant used abusive language against the staff as well as manager of the opposite party bank. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party submitted that the language, the complainant has used in the complaint ,itself shows that he has no regard for any peson. So the opposite party bank branch in consultation with the higher authorites had decided to close the account of the complainant and he was informed to do so vide letter dated 24.9.2014 Ex,.C-7. Opposite party has also produced on record copy of the instructions/notification regarding use of unparliamentary language by customers Ex.OP3 that opposite party bank reserves his right that if the customers found to be offensive in their interaction with the staff of the Bank, ICICI Bank will be required to close all their relationship with the ICICI Bank. Ld.counsel for the opposite party further submitted that opposite party bank reserves his right requiring such customers to close his accounts with the opposite party bank. As such there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

8. From the entire above discussion particularly the depositions made by Sh. Neeraj Sharma, branch manager, it stands fully proved on record that on 23.8.2014 the complainant visited the opposite party bank branch office for some transactions i.e. withdrawal of amount. But the branch network was down. They had lodged a

-12-

service request to network team at Mumbai to restore the primary or secondary network and it was instructed to the staff to inform the customers while accepting cash that credits in their account would happen only after restoration of network and if there was urgency the customers should be diverted to other branches. On that day Varinder Kaur, branch cashier attended the complainant. She informed the complainant that branch network was down, so his request could be processed later on. She also advised the complainant that if he had urgency, he could visit nearby ATM to withdraw the cash. The complainant then left the bank branch and again came to the branch after a few mintues and again Varinder Kaur cashier expressed her inability to process the request as network was not restored till then. The complainant became angy . He used unparliamentary language and then came to the branch manager's cabin and demanded complaint book. The branch manager was busy on telephone with network team at Mumbai to get restored/resolved the network issue. The branch manager offered seat to the complainant and requested him to wait for a while , but he started shouting. The branch manager then dropped the call to attend him and asked the complainant about his problem. But the complainant insited to provide him complaint book. The branch manager requested the complainant that he was there to resolve his problem. Then the complainant shouted at the branch manager that their ATMs were always out of service. The branch network remains down and then put a lock at branch shutter. The other staff

-13-

of the bank branch as well as Sales Manager of the opposite party bank Mr. Avtar Singh, who was incidently present there, tried to pacify the complainant that they were trying their best to get the network restored with the intervention of network team of the bank at Mumbai, but the complainant was not ready to listen and started shouting in the bank branch that he would lodge complaint to higher authorites against the manager as well as branch staff and they should be ready for the consequences .Even the said scenes are captured by the CCTV camera of the branch. This witness further deposed in his affidavit Ex.OP1 that the complainant used unparliamentary language before the staff including the lady staff of the opposite party bank branch. All this fully proves that the behaviour of the complainant with the branch manager, staff including lady staff of the opposite party bank branch was totally bad and not of a prudent human being. No doubt the opposite party bank branch has duty to give best possible services and good behaviour to the customers , but it is also the duty of the customers to behave properly with the staff from whom he is to get the services. The behaviour of the complainant towards the staff and even the manager of the opposite party bank was very cruel as is evident from the language he has used in the complaint itself. He has addressed the manager of the opposite party bank as inmate of mental asylum. He also stated that the behaviour of the branch manager was very rude. He behaved baboon like antics. He further mentioned in the complaint that how could

-14-

that person, whose behaviour was worst than a peon, be the manager of the bank branch. He further stated in his pleadings that the employees of the opposite party bank have quality like indifferent attitude, deaf ears, in-courtesy, inefficiency, impatience and impoliteness. He narrated the staff of the opposite party bank as stupid, shameless and senseless staff. The complainant is an Advocate. He is not supposed to have used such an unfair and unparliamentary language against the branch manager and the saff of the opposite party bank branch. Rather the complainant is an educated person fully knowing the rights and duties of every individual/employee and customers, being a lawyer, as such his behaviour should be proper.

9. Resultantly we hold that opposite party was justified in issuing letter dated 24.9.2014 Ex.C-7 to the complainant stating that in view of the unpleasant nature of interactions of the complainant with staff of the opposite party bank branch and in view of the policies of the bank, they informed the complainant that he is required to close his relationship with the opposite party bank and he was given 30 days notice asking the complainant to close his relationship with the opposite party bank and they also requested the complainant to abstain from issuing any cheques against any account including in the above relationships as any cheque which is presented for payment after closure of such account shall not be honoured and the opposite party bank shall not be liable for any loss after the closure of the

-15-

relationship by the complainant with the opposite party bank. Counsel for the opposite party also produced on record copy of the Code of Bank's Commitment to

Customers January 2014, clause 8.1.6 vide which the bank has right to close relationship with the customer if his behaviour is not proper, after giving 30 days notice indicating the reasons for such closure. In such cases the customer will be required to make alternative arrangement for cheques already issued and is also required to desist from issuing any fresh cheques on such account. The opposite party bank has also produced on record instructions Ex.OP3 regading use of unparliamentary language by the customers in the bank branch which also empowers the bank that where customers resorting to provocative and unparliamentary language or rude and disruptive behaviour, stretch tolerance, cause distress and impact on morale and efficiency. This can lead to a compromise in the level of service received by other customers and is , therefore, not tenable. Therefore, despite the acknowledged primacy that a customer in the service industry commands, they must inform the customers with the greatest reluctance and deepest regret that henceforth customers found to be offensive in their interaction with the staff of the bank will be required to close all their relationships with ICICI Bank. So keeping in view the behaviour of the complainant with the staff of the opposite party bank including the manager as well as lady staff,we hold that the opposite party was justified in issuing letter Ex.C-7.

-16-

10. Resultantly this complaint is disposed of with the directions that opposite party may implement this letter regarding closure of the saving bank account of the complainant i.e. closure of relationship with the complainant, but the opposite party is directed not to close FDRs as well as Recurring deposits accounts of the complainant till their maturity . Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

6.11.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)

/R/ Member Member