Date of filing: 25.01.2019
Date of disposal : 24.04.2023
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
THIRUVALLUR
BEFORE TMT. Dr.S.M. LATHA MAHESWARI, M.A.,M.L, Ph.D (Law) .…. PRESIDENT
THIRU.P.MURUGAN,M.Com.ICWA(Inter),B.L., ....MEMBER-II
RBT/CC. No.74/2022
THIS MONDAY, THE 24th DAY OF APRIL 2023
(CC.No.69/2019 sent from DCDRC, Chennai North)
Mrs.V.Vanitha,
Mr.A.John Manoharan
No.78/B, Kujji Main Street,
Anna Nagar, (East), Chennai 102. ……Complainants.
//Vs//
1.Life Insurance Corporation of India, Division-II,
Rep. by its Divisional Manager,
at 2nd Floor, United India Buildings,
Esplanade, Chennai 600 108.
2.Indian Overseas Bank,
Anna Nagar Branch,
Rep. by its Branch Manager,
Anna Nagar (East), Chennai 102.
3.YES BANK,
Head Office, Kosmo One, Tower C,
Sai Nagar, Plot No.14, 3rd Main Road,
Near Telephone Exchange,
Mogappair West, Ambattur Industrial Estate,
Chennai 600 058. .......Opposite parties.
Counsel for the complainants : M/s. N.Dhanasekaran, Advocate.
Counsel for the 2nd opposite party : M/s.K.Nethrasikamani , Advocate.
Counsel for the 1st opposite party : M/s.M.B.Gopalan Associates.
Counsel for the 3rd opposite party : Exparte.
This complaint has been filed before DCDRC, Chennai (North) as CC.No.61/2019 and transferred to this commission by the order of the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai and taken on file as CC.No.74/2022 and this complaint coming before us on various dates and finally on 11.04.2023 in the presence of M/s. N.Dhanasekaran, counsel for the complainant and M/s.K.Nethrasikamani counsel for the 2nd oppostie party and upon perusing the documents and evidences of both sides, this Commission delivered the following:
ORDER
PRONOUNCED BY TMT.Dr.S.M.LATHA MAHESWARI, PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service with regard to illegally debiting ECS return charges of Rs.177/- for six times along with a prayer to pay a sum of Rs.1,98,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant and to refund a sum of Rs.1062 being the wrong deductions of ECS charges with 18% interest per annum from 29.06.2018 till date of realization with cost of the proceedings.
Summary of facts culminating into complaint:-
It was the case of the complainant that she had joined Jeevan Lakshya under Policy No.708550584 dated 28.03.2016 for a sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- with a monthly premium of Rs.492/-. She had nominated her minor son J.Jenish and the 2nd complainant husband of the 1st complainant had also joined Jeevan Lakshya under Policy No.708550619 dated 28.03.2016 for a sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- on a monthly premium of Rs.558/- who nominated his minor daughter J.Jeniesha as a nominee. The first complainant states that they have adopted the ECS mode of payments for the above said monthly premiums through saving Account No.027001000051528 of the 1st complainant through Indian Overseas Bank i.e. the 2nd opposite party herein. On 28.06.2018 a sum of Rs.503/- and Rs.571/- were debited from the account of the 1st complainant towards premium but the same were re-credited into her account. Complainant states that on 29.06.2018 a sum of Rs.177/- has been debited as ECS return charges for six times on the same date itself amounting to Rs.1062/- and the complainants were very much surprised and shocked to receive a letter dated 04.07.2018 from the 1st opposite party intimating that the Account was closed or no such account. It was submitted that due to dereliction of duty and negligence on the part of the opposite parties the complainants suffered loss, stress, strain and mental agony. Due to negligence in deducting ECS charges of Rs.177/- for six times amounting to Rs.1062/- they have to pay penal interest for the delayed payments and also for renewal premiums of the policy. Thus aggrieved by the act of the opposite parties the present complaint was filed to direct the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.1,98,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant and to refund a sum of Rs.1062 being the wrong deductions of ECS charges with 18% interest per annum from 29.06.2018 till date of realization with cost of the proceedings.
Crux of the defence put forth by the 1st opposite party:-
The complainants had obtained two Jeevan Akshaya Policies Nos.708550584 and 708550619 for monthly premium of Rs.558 plus GST and Rs.492 plus GST and had opted for payment through ECS. For such mode the 1st opposite party received the payment through the nominated Bank of the complainant. Honoring of the ECS, the transfer of money including debiting of complainant’s bank account are all done by the complainant bank viz the 2nd opposite party. The 2nd opposite party dishonored the ECS and hence they same was diligently communicated by the 1st opposite party to the complainants. But for the dishonor by the 2nd opposite party there was no necessity for the 1st opposite party to inform the same to the complainants. The 1st opposite party is unaware of the debit of ECS dishonor charges. The dishonor and the collection of dishonor charges are done by the 2nd opposite party and the 1st opposite party has no role in the same. In any case debiting and crediting done by the 2nd opposite party, the 1st opposite party cannot be held liable in any manner. The 1st opposite party sent letter dated 04.07.2018 due to dishonor of the ECS to inform the complainants of the same so that steps could be taken to pay the premium in any other manner and keep the policy alive and that there is no deficiency in service on their part sought for dismissal of the complaint.
Crux of the defence put forth by the 2nd opposite party:-
The 2nd opposite party filed version disputing the complaint allegations contending interaila that the averments related to the 1st opposite party and not related to the 2nd opposite party. Further only the 1st complainant was maintaining a Saving Bank Account No.0270001000051528 with the 2nd opposite party and the 2nd complainant is neither maintaining any account with the 2nd opposite party nor customer of the 2nd opposite party and thus the 2nd complainant doesn’t have any locus standi in filing the present complaint and did not have any right in praying the relief as against the 2nd opposite party. As per the ECS mandate the 1st complainant shall maintain sufficient balance in her account to pass the ECS mandate every month, failing which necessary charges will be levied by the 2nd opposite party for every return in respect of insufficient balance in the account of the 1st complainant. It was further submitted that on 28.06.2018 the 1st opposite party Bankers viz YES Bank wrongly submitted multiple duplicate ECS Debit transaction through clearing. The same were returned for want of funds as well as on their request to return the multiple demand. Hence accordingly the charges Rs.1062 (177x6) for the duplicate returns were debited on 28.08.2018 from the account of the 1st complainant. The 2nd opposite party debit only the charges in respect of maintaining insufficient balance in the account and therefore the 2nd opposite party is entitled for levy of the charges. Thereby the 1st complainant is only having recourse against the YES Bank who are Bankers to the 1st opposite party who wrongly lodged multiple ECS Demands and not against the 2nd opposite party. Therefore the claim made against the 2nd opposite party is devoid of merits and the complaint filed against them to be dismissed.
On the side of complainant proof affidavit was filed and submitted documents marked as Ex.A1 to A15. On the side of 1st opposite party proof affidavit was filed and submitted document Ex.B1 was marked on their side. On the side of the 2nd opposite party proof affidavit was filed and submitted documents Ex.B2 & Ex.B3 were marked on their side. The 3rd opposite party was called absent and set exparte on 27.03.2023 for non appearance and non filing of written version within the period of statue.
Points for consideration:
Whether the allegations made by the complainant with regard to illegally debiting ECS return charges of Rs.177/- for six times on 29.06.2018 amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
If so to what reliefs the complainant is entitled?
Point No.1:-
The following documents were filed on the side of complainant in support of his contentions;
Jeevan Lakshya Policy No.708550584 dated 28.03.2016 was marked as Ex.A1;
Jeevan Lakshya Policy No.708550619 dated 28.03.2016 was marked as Ex.A2;
Statement of Account by the 1st complainant in Indian Overseas Bank Limited was marked as Ex.A3;
Letter from the 1st opposite party to the 1st complainant dated 04.07.2018 was marked as Ex.A4;
Renewal premium receipt of the 1st complainant dated 20.08.2018 was marked as Ex.A5;
Renewal premium receipt of the 2nd complainant dated 20.08.2018 was marked as Ex.A6;
Legal notice issued by the complainants to the opposite parties dated 25.09.2018 was marked as Ex.A7;
Acknowledgement card for proof of delivery to the 1st opposite party was marked as Ex.A8;
Acknowledgement card for proof of delivery to the 2nd opposite party was marked as Ex.A9;
Reply from the 1st opposite party dated 06.10.2018 was marked as Ex.A10;
Complaint to the Banking Ombudsman dated 02.11.2018 was marked as Ex.A11;
Postal acknowledgement card for proof of delivery was marked as Ex.A12;
Interim Reply dated 10.12.2018 was marked as Ex.A13;
Final reply dated 11.03.2019 was marked as Ex.A14;
Statement of account of the 1st complainant in Indian Overseas Bank was marked as Ex.A15;
The following documents were filed on the side of opposite parties in support of their defence;
ECS Dishonour advice from Bank was marked as Ex.B1;
Saving Bank Account Statement of 1st complainant was marked as B2;
Copy of email from Yes bank Limited dated 28.06.2018 was marked as Ex.B3;
The crux of the arguments made on behalf of the complainant is that she was paying the Insurance premium through ECS debited from her Account with 2nd opposite party. On 29.06.2018 Rs.177/- was debited for six times continuously towards ECS return charges. When enquired the 1st opposite party informed that they were no way related to the alleged debits and refused to return the amount debited. The 2nd opposite party also did not re-credit the amount. After issuance of notice also no re-credit was made. However, after the complaint was filed before this commission on 13.02.2019 the said amount was re-credited to the complainant‘s account. Thus the complainant sought for the complaint to be allowed.
The 1st opposite party did not adduce any oral arguments and in written arguments it is stated that their job ends with issuance of policy and collecting premium for the same and the complainant’s allegations that wrongly ECS return charges were debited is not related to any transactions with them and they are not aware of the same. Argued that they could not be held liable in any manner. When the ECS payments were dishonored the same was communicated to the complainant on 04.07.2017 and the said letter was done in good faith to keep the policy alive. Thus there is no valid cause of action against the opposite party and they sought for the complaint to be dismissed.
The 2nd opposite party submits that it is only Yes Bank which was given the ECS mandate and the matter has been referred to the Ombudsman and the amount was re-credited on 13.02.2019. It is only due to technical defects in the system of Yes Bank multiple debit transactions were debited from the savings Bank Account of the complainant. The fault of the Yes Bank is clearly established by the email correspondences between the LIC and the Yes Bank. Thus it was submitted that it is only the Yes Bank which committed the deficiency/default and no deficiency was committed by them, sought for dismissal of the complaint.
On appreciation of the entire pleadings and materials it is seen that the opposite parties 1 &2 had admitted the factum of illegal/faulty debit of ECS return charges on 29.06.2018. However, it is contended by them that the fault was on the part of Yes Bank and Yes Bank is a necessary party. The complainant subsequently amended the complaint and impleaded the Yes Bank as 3rd opposite party. However, they did not appear before this commission to contest the allegations against them. It is seen that via email dated 15.06.2019 from Yes Bank to LIC as follows “We have checked at our end all the transactions presented from our end is to return with reason Balance insufficient & Mis Miscellaneous – Others, provides us the bank Statement for the policy holder against the charges debited to duplicate the transactions” and also it is seen that via Email dated 15.06.2019 from LIC to Yes Bank “kindly provide us with all the details of the multiple debits on 28.06.2018 nach cycle that happened for the above policies. Also confirm whether the above policies were dishonored at the first instance itself and also the number of debits/instances”. Further, Ex.B3 the email reply from the Yes Bank admits that due to technical issues duplicate ECS transactions had presented from their end. Thus it is evident that it is only the 3rd opposite party Yes Bank who has given the multiple ECS mandate had committed the default which resulted in six debits towards ECS return charges on the same day for a total amount of Rs.1062/-. Though it is admitted by the complainant that after filing of the complaint the Yes Bank admitting their fault, the matter has been settled and the disputed amount of Rs.1062/- has been paid back, this commission is of the view that there is negligence deficiency in service on the part of 3rd opposite party for the reason that Banking Services being Service providers must be deligent and prudent enough in not committing fault on their part. Hence we hold that the allegations made by the complainant with regard to illegally debiting ECS return charges of Rs.177/- for six times on 29.06.2018 amounts to deficiency in service on the part of 3rd opposite party alone for which the 1st and 2nd opposite party could not be held liable. Thus we answer the point accordingly in favour of the complainant and as against the 3rd opposite party.
Point No.2:-
As it is admitted that the disputed amount has been credited back for the default committed by the 3rd opposite party we award a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the 3rd opposite party to the complainant within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed against opposite parties 1 & 2 and partly allowed against 3rd opposite party directing them;
a) To pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) towards compensation for the mental agony and hardship caused to the complainant within six week from the date of receipt of copy of this order;
b) To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards litigation expenses to the complainant.
Dictated by the President to the steno-typist, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 24th day of April 2023.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER-II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
List of document filed by the complainant:-
Ex.A1 28.03.2016 Jeevan Lakshya Policy No.708550584. Xerox
Ex.A2 28.03.2016 Jeevan Lakshya Policy No.708550619. Xerox
Ex.A3 .............. Indian Overseas Bank Limited, Saving Bank Account No.027001000051528 Statement. Xerox
Ex.A4 04.07.2018 Letter from 1st opposite party. Xerox
Ex.A5 20.08.2018 Renewal premium receipt Xerox
Ex.A6 20.08.2018 Renewal premium receipt. Xerox
Ex.A7 25.09.2018 Legal notice issued by the complainant. Xerox
Ex.A8 .................. Acknowledgement card. Xerox
Ex.A9 ............... Acknowledgement card. Xerox
Ex.A10 06.10.2018 Reply from 1st opposite party. Xerox
Ex.A11 01.11.2018 Complaint to the Banking Ombudsman. Xerox
Ex.A12 ............... Acknowledgement card. Xerox
Ex.A13 10.12.2018 Interim reply. Xerox
Ex.A14 11.03.2019 Final reply. Xerox
Ex.A15 ............... Indian Overseas Bank Limited, Saving Bank Account No.027001000051528 present Statement. Xerox
List of documents filed by the 1st opposite party:-
Ex.B1 ............. ECS Dishonour advise from Bank. Xerox
List of documents filed by the 2nd opposite party:-
Ex.B2 ............. SB Account Statement. Xerox
Ex.B3 28.06.2018 Copy of mail from YES Bank Limited. Xerox
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER-II MEMBER I PRESIDENT
