JUDGMENT AND ORDER
The Managing Director of South Point High School, Silchar as Complainant filed this case against the Manager, IDBI Bank Ltd., Silchar Branch and others , the Opposite Party ( in short O.P.) stating the facts that in the name of South Point High School there is a Account bearing No.-293104000017833 with the IDBI Bank, Silchar Branch. The complainant has been operating the said account since long on regular basis. That the said account is used for depositing the school fees collected from the students and for disbursement of salary and other incidental expenses of the school. It is stated that in the month of November’ 2018 the complainant sent school staff to withdraw money from the aforesaid account for disbursement of salary but they were informed by the bank that the account has been frozen on account of non-submission of KYC. Then the complainant submitted all relevant papers and documents alongwith the duly filled up Form for KYC and the same was accepted by the bank on 12/11/2018. Thereafter on 14/11/2018 when the office Assistant of the complainant went to the bank again then he was informed that the account has been frozen on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Supratik Dey. According to the complainant, such act of freezing of the account of the school is beyond the norms of banking practice and grossly illegal. It has been further stated by the complainant that such freezing of the school account by the bank has occasioned great inconvenience and hardship to the complainant as the complainant could not disburse the staff salary. As such, being aggrieved this complaint has been brought by the complainant praying for declaration that the act of freezing the school account by the O.P. is illegal, arbitrary, malafide and for awarding compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- to the complainant for the disservice, loss, mental agony and harassment and for granting of permanent/temporary injunction directing to make the account of the school operative by lifting the freeze.
On receipt of the notice of the case only O.P. No.-3 Industrial Development Bank of India ( in short IDBI ), Silchar Branch contested the case by filing written statement wherein it has been stated, interalia, that there is no cogent reason for filing this complaint, that this Forum has no jurisdiction to try this case, that the claim is barred by limitation etc. etc. According to the contesting O.P. as per the guidelines of RBI the account maintaintained by a Trust is marked as High Risk Category and KYC compliance by the Account holder at least every two years is a must. It is stated that the O.P. bank requested the complainant to furnish KYC acceptable documents accompanied with a duly filled up form to the answering O.P. branch and for that purpose copies of forms for KYC were handed over to one Moloy Rishi, the office bearer of the complainant with necessary instruction but the complainant did not provide any documents for KYC compliance. So the answering O.P. bank had to freeze the debit facility of the account of the complainant on 12/11/2018 due to non-submission of KYC documents. Further version of the O.P. bank is that subsequently though photostat copy of PAN card and copies of resolutions of the trust was submitted to the bank through Moloy Rishi and another Aniketh Deb Roy but inspite of asking to produce the original PAN card for verification purpose and to furnish explanation regarding discrepencies and contradictions found in the resolutions and Trust deed which are to be forwarded to the Kolkata RPU of the answering bank for debit freeze removal the complainant did not comply with the instructions. As a result the freeze could not be lifted. It has been claimed by the answering O.P. that the action of the bank is bonafide and the O.P.bank has not caused any disservice to the complainant. The complaint is frivolous and vexatious and hence liable to be dismissed with cost.
In support of the case, the complainant submitted his evidence on affidavit as PW-1 alongwith some exhibited documents. On the other hand, from the side of O.P. IDBI Bank Ltd., Silchar Branch, evidence on affidavit of Sri Debojyoti Paul, Branch Manager of the O.P. bank was submitted as DW-1 alongwith some exhibited documents. After closing of the evidence both sides submitted written argument. Perused the entire evidence on record. Let us appreciate the evidence below.
PW-1 in his evidence has averred that he is the Managing Director of South Point High School, Silchar and in the name of the School there is a Account bearing No.-293104000017833 with the IDBI Bank, Silchar Branch. That being Managing Director he has been operating the said account on regular basis and the account is used for depositing the school fees collected from the students and for disbursement of salary and other incidental expenses of the school. Further averment of PW-1 is that in the month of November’ 2018 he sent school staff to withdraw money from the aforesaid account for disbursement of salary for the month of October,2018 but they were informed by the bank that the account has been frozen on account of non-submission of KYC. Thereafter, according to PW-1, he submitted all the relevant papers and documents alongwith the duly filled up Form for KYC and the same was accepted by the bank on 12/11/2018. The evidence of PW-1 further goes to show that on 14/11/2018 his office Assistant again went to the bank to withdraw the necessary amount for disbursement of the staff salary but this time he was informed that the account has been frozen on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Supratik Dey. According to PW-1, such act of freezing the account of the school is beyond the norms of banking practice and grossly illegal and the Bank authority has no legal right or authority to freeze an operational account without any prior intimation to the account holder. It has been further stated by PW-1 that such freezing of the school account by the bank has occasioned great inconvenience and hardship as he could not disburse the staff salary. But the version of DW-1 is that the complainant was requested to furnish KYC acceptable documents accompanied with a duly filled up form to the answering O.P. branch and for that purpose copies of forms for KYC were also handed over to one Moloy Rishi, the office bearer of the complainant with necessary instruction but the complainant did not provide any documents for KYC compliance. So the answering O.P. bank had to freeze the debit facility of the account of the complainant on 12/11/2018 due to non-submission of KYC documents. Further version of the O.P. bank is that subsequently though on 13/11/2018 photostat copy of PAN card and copies of resolutions of the trust was submitted to the bank through Moloy Rishi and another Aniketh DebRoy but inspite of asking them to produce the original PAN card for verification purpose and to furnish explanation regarding discrepencies and contradictions found in the resolutions and Trust deed which are to be forwarded to the Kolkata RPU of the answering bank for debit freeze removal but the complainant did not comply with the instructions. DW-1 has specifically denied that the debit freeze in the accont was initiated on the basis of the complaint of Supratik Dey as because the complaint of Supratik Dey has no bearing on KYC compliance. It has been further stated by DW-1 that as per the guidelines of RBI the account maintaintained by a Trust is marked as High Risk Category and KYC compliance by the Account holder at least every two years is a must otherwise initially the debit facility of the account may be frozen and ultimately in the event of non-compliance the credit facility also may be frozen rendering the account inoperative. In support of his claim DW-1 has exhibited the certified copy of RBI guidelines as Ext.-A. DW-1 has averred that the freeze in the account of the complainant could not be lifted because of non-compliance of KYC stipulations. From the evidence of PW-1 it also reveals that the bank asked for submission of KYC . According to PW-1, he submitted all the relevant papers and documents alongwith the duly filled up Form for KYC and the same was accepted by the bank on 12/11/2018. But there is nothing in the evidence of PW-1 to show that he produced the original PAN card for verification purpose and furnished explanation regarding discrepencies and contradictions found in the resolutions and Trust deed as asked by the O.P. Bank. On the other hand, it is found that Ext.-A copy of RBI guidelines support the actions taken by the Bank in respect of periodic KYC updation and freezing of the transactions of the complainant’s account.
From the above discussions of the materials available on record it does not appear that the O.P. Bank caused any disservice to the complainant rather the action of the O.P. Bank is found bonafide. That being the position the case of the complainant stands dismissed on contest . The parties shall bear their own costs.
Given under our seal and signature on this 26th day of April’ 2022.
