IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  FORUM, 

                      MURSHIDABAD ,  AT  BERHAMPORE.

                                CASE No.  CC No. 01/2017.

Date of Filing :                    Date of Admission :                      Date of Disposal :

  16.01.2017                                24.01.2017                                      12.07.2018

1. Khondekar Abul Hasan
2. Khondekar Mahamadul Hasan
3.  Khondekar Moksudul Hasan
4.  Khondekar Mustak Hasan

     All S/O Khondekar Nure Ahasan

5.  Najmun Nahar

     D/O Khondekar Nure Ahasan

6.  Lutfun Nahar

      W/O Ahasanul Haque

7.  Jinnatun Nhar @ Gulman Begam

W/O Ali Hossen Mohammed

Alamgir Chowdhury

All of Sizgram, P.O-Sizgram

P.S:- Bharatpur, Dist- Murshidabad          ……………… Complainants.

      -Vs –

 The Manager

Bank of India.

Berhampore Branch

14, Bimal Sinha Road

P.O & P.S-Berhampore

Murshidabad.PIN-742101                                              …............ Opposite Party.

                                                                                                Cont. ……….…. 2

= 2 =

Sri  Sougata Biswas ,   Ld. Advocate                     ……… for the Complainants

Sri  Jayanta Bagchi ,   Ld. Advocate                      ……… for the Opposite Party

           Present :   Ashis Kumar Senapati ………… President.

                         Chandrima Chakraborty …­. .…. Member.           

J U D G M E N T

 Chandrima Chakraborty,  Member.

               Claiming himself as a consumer, under the C. P. Act, 1986, the Complainant has sought for interference of this Forum in respect of fact complained of.

               The case stated in the complaint, in succinct, is that, the Complainants are the legal heirs of the deceased Khondekar Akhtarul @ Khairul Khondekar, who was the account holder, being Account No. 421010100029619 in the Opposite Party Bank. After death of the said demised  Khondekar Akhtarul @ Khairul Khondekar on 19.09.2011, the legal heirs of the said deceased had filed a Succession Case, being No. 08/2013, before the Civil Judge, Jr. Div. 2^nd Court, at Kandi, Murshidabad, for obtaining the Succession Certificate and the Succession Certificate was issued in favour of these Complainants.

                                                                                                Cont. ……….…. 3

= 3 =

               Thereafter these Complainants had filed an application before the Opposite Party Bank to disburse the remaining amount of the demised Khondekar Akhtarul @ Khairul Khondekar towards these Complainants but the Opposite Party Bank refused to disburse the same in the favour of these Complainants for which the Complainants sent a legal notice on 22.06.2016 to the Opposite Party Bank but the Opposite Party Bank remained silent, what amounts to negligence and deficiency in rendering service by the Opposite Party towards the Complainants for which being victimized and harassed by the Opposite Party Bank these Complainants finding no other alternative than to file the instant case seeking adequate redressal against the Opposite Party Bank. 

                Resisting the complaint, the Opposite Party Bank filed the Written Version denying the contention made by the Complainant in his complaint and stating inter alia that the case is not maintainable, the Complainant has no cause of action, barred by limitation and the Forum has no jurisdiction to deal the instant matter.        

                The specific case of the Opposite Party Bank in gist is that, these Complainants have no locus standi to file the instant case against the Opposite Party claiming the amount of Rs. 37,000.00/- only along with other benefits. The actual fact is that the SBI  Account No. 421010100029619 is a Joint Account of  Khairul Khondekar  and  Dilruba Sarkar  on mandate of operation of the ‘either or survivor’.  So the complainants/claimants of the demised Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar  as his legal heirs are not entitled to get any amount of the said SBI  Account.

                                                                                                Cont. ……….…. 4

= 4 =

                Moreover the Complainants have not made party that Dilruba Sarkar in the said Misc. Case No. 08/2013 for getting the Succession Certificate in respect of the aforesaid dues for which this Opposite Party Bank is not liable to the Complainants for disbursement of the said amount lying in the Account of the deceased Khondekar Akhtarul @ Khairul Khondekar in favour of these Complainants as the Succession Certificate in respect of the so called amount has no force over this Opposite party Bank. Thus, the Opposite Party denied any deficiency and negligence in rendering service towards the Complainants and prayed for dismissal of the instant case.

Point for Determination

1. Whether the instant case is maintainable ?

2. Whether the Complainant is a consumer ?

3. Whether there is negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?      

4. Whether the Complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?

Decision with Reasons

               All the points are taken up together for consideration for convenience and brevity.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

               On overall evaluation of the argument made before us by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainants and for the Opposite Party and the critically perusing all the material evidences on record, it is evident that admittedly the Complainant is a consumer under this Opposite Party having  the  SBI  Account No. 421010100029619.

                                                                                              Cont. ……….…. 5

= 5 =

                The record reveals from the documents filed by the Complainants that after death of the said Account Holder Khondekar Akhtarul @ Khairul Khondekar on 19.09.2011, the Complainants as the legal heirs of the said deceased had filed a Succession Case, being No. 08/2013, before the Civil Judge, Jr. Div. 2^nd Court, at Kandi, Murshidabad, for obtaining the ‘Succession Certificate’ and after due process the ‘Succession Certificate’ was issued in favour of these Complainants which is admitted by the Opposite Party.

                But on the other hand, it is manifestly evident from the documents (photocopy of the Pass Book of the demised Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar, which was not submitted by the Complainants) filed by the Opposite Party that  the said SBI  Account No. 421010100029619, in question, is a Joint Account of  deceased Khairul Khondekar  and  Dilruba Sarkar and the mandate for account operation was selected by both the account holder as ‘either or survivor’.  So after the death of one the other is the only account holder who can operate the said account and as such these complainants/claimants of the demised Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar  as his legal heirs are not entitled to get any amount of the said SBI  Account as because the other account holder named Dilruba Sarkar was still alive.

                Moreover, the Opposite Party Bank specifically alleged that in the ‘Succession Certificate’  Case being No. 08/2013, before the Civil Judge, Jr. Div. 2^nd Court, at Kandi, Murshidabad, the photocopy of which document has filed by the Complainants, the Complainants have not made party to  that other account holder  Dilruba Sarkar in the said Misc. Case which is palpably revealed from the said document. 

                                                                                              Cont. ……….…. 6

= 6 =

                Furthermore,   the Ld. Advocate for the Complainants failed to get any satisfactory reply at the time of hearing argument on this point that why the Complainants not made party to that Dilruba Sarkar, who ws the Joint account holder of that account when it is within the knowledge of them that the said account in question was a Joint Account.

                Thus it is very much obvious from the aforesaid situation that the said account was a joint account of the deceased Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar  and  Dilruba Sarkar  with the mandate of operation ‘either or survivor’ and after the death of the said Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar the other account holder named Dilruba Sarkar was still alive and the only claimant of the said account in issue.  So the Complainants/Consumers/Claimants of the demised Khondekar Akhtarul Hassan @ Khairul Khondekar  as his legal heirs are not entitled to get any amount from this particular  SBI  Account No. 421010100029619.

                So it is the unanimous view of the Forum that the Opposite Party Bank is reasonably justified to refuse the claim of the Complainants/Claimants regarding this account and for which  the case is liable to be dismissed on merit in favour of the Opposite Party Bank.

                In light of the above analysis, we are of the opinion that the Complainant is not entitled to get the relief as prayed for and consequentially the points for consideration are decided in negative.

               In short, the Complainants deserve failure.

      In the result, we proceed to pass

                                                                                              Cont. ……….…. 7

= 7 =

                                           O R D E R

                That the case be and the same is dismissed on merit against the Opposite Party without any cost.

                 Parties to bear their own cost.

      Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post  to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.