IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KANNUR

Present:

 Sri.K.Gopalan                 :       President

 Smt.K.P.Preethakumari :         Member

 Smt.M.D.Jessy                :        Member

Dated this,  the 26^th day of  December  2009.

C.C.No.193/07

     Sibimon,

     S/o Chacko,

     Mathoor Saranya,                                        :           Complainant

     Nedumudy P.O.,

    Alappuzha.

Vs.

1.  The Manager,

     State Bank of India,

     Kuthuparamba Branch,                        

     Kannur District.

2.  Dr.Ammini, D/o/Kuttappan,

     Aged 35 years,                                            :           Opposite Parties  

     Doctor,

     Government Ayurveda Hospital,

     Guruvayoor,

     Trissur.

                                                            O R D E R

Smt.K.P.Preethakumari, Member.

This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to restore the account of the Complainant with them and to pay Rs.75000/- as compensation and cost.

            The Complainant’s case is that he is having a joint account with Opposite Party’s  Bank along with his wife Ammini.S., the 2^nd Opposite Party and the account No. was 10645207861. The Complainant came to know on 18.08.07 that the said account is transferred to the branch at Guruvayoor, while he approached the 1^st Opposite Party for withdrawal of money without the consent and concurrence of him and had withdrawn some amount from the account without his consent.  So the Complainant issued a lawyer notice to the 1^st Opposite Party asking them to restore the account.  Even though the 1^st opposite Party had received the notice they neither issued reply   nor restored the account.  The transfer of account without the consent and knowledge of the complainant is amounts to deficiency of service.  Hence this complaint.

            On receiving notice from the Forum 1^st Opposite Party appeared through Adv. T.Achuthan Nair  and 2^nd Opposite Party through Adv.K.Vinodraj and filed their version.

The 1^st Opposite Party filed version contenting that the above Savings Bank Account was opened on 09/11/02 by the 2^nd Opposite Party who is the wife of the Complainant.  Later on 03.03.05 she gave a letter to the bank asking to make the account as joint one by including her husband Sibimon.P.C. and accordingly it was converted to a joint account, either or survivor.  On 08.01.07 the 2^nd Opposite Party gave another letter stating that she is transferred to Guruvayoor and so the amount may be transferred to Guruvayoor  branch.  As a result the account was transferred to Guruvayoor branch with immediate effect and later on 2007 August, the Complainant approached the bank for withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- using withdrawal slip.  When withdrawals done using withdrawal slip, bank should insist to produce pass book and when insisted so, the complainant said that it was misplaced.  The payment was refused and on 18.08.07 the complainant gave a letter to the 1^st Opposite Party stating that the account has been transferred without the consent of both Ammini and himself.  But the transfer of account to Guruvayoor has been done as per the request of account holder who opened the S.B.Account and hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of 1^st Opposite Party and hence the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

            The 2^nd Opposite Party admits that the Complainant is having joint account with the 1^st Opposite Party along with the 2^nd Opposite Party and on 18.08.07, the Complainant approached the 1^st Opposite Party for withdrawal and he learnt that the account is transferred to Guruvayoor etc.  The 2^nd Opposite Party opened an S.B.Account with the 1^st Opposite Party on 09.11.02 and 03.03.05, gave a letter to the Bank asking to make the account as joint by including the Complainant and hence the account was converted into joint account :”Either or survivor”.  On 08.01.07 the 2^nd Opposite Party gave another letter to the 1^st Opposite Party to transfer the account to Guruvayoor and as per rules considering the request 1^st Opposite Party transferred the account to Guruayoor branch.  The entire amount which was in the credit of the account was deposited by 2^nd Opposite Party and the passbook and the cheque book are in the custody of 2^nd Opposite Party.  So the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

            Upon the above pleadings the following issues have been raised for consideration

1. Whether there is any deficiency on the part of Opposite Parties?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief
3. Relief and cost

The evidence in the above case consists of the oral testimony of  PW1 and Exts.A1 to A3 and X1.

           The complainant has produced the documents A1 to A3 ie. lawyer notice, Postal

receipt and acknowledgement and X1 which is master circular with respect to Savings Bank Account of SBI issued by Corporate Centre of SBI Mumbai.  From the admission of Opposite Parties and from the documents produced it is clear that the 1^st Opposite Party was transferred the joint account No.10645207861 to the Guruvayoor branch.  So the question arises in this case is whether the 1^st Opposite Party has right to transfer the joint account without the knowledge and consent of the Complainant.  The 1^st Opposite Party contented that the account was opened by 2^nd Opposite Party and later on as per her request it was transferred as joint account including the Complainant and the 2^nd Opposite Party has produced the balance cheques and passbook along with the transfer application and hence 1^st Opposite Party has transferred the account to the Guruvayoor branch.  But in para.44 of Exhibit X1 produced by 1^st Opposite Party as per the direction of Forum.  It is clearly stated that in case of transfer of joint accounts (operable by both jointly or both or survivor or all of them or survivors or either or survivor) all the joint account holders must sign the request letter to transfer the account.  But the photocopy of the letter produced by the 1^st Opposite Party dt. 08.01.07 is a transfer application by 2^nd Opposite Party alone.  It was not signed by the Complainant.  So it is very clear that the bank ie. 1^st Opposite Party has shown deficiency in service by transferring the joint account without the consent signature of the Complainant, who is a joint account holder in the application for transfer.  The 2^nd Opposite Party has no case that the Complainant has knowledge about the transfer.  So it is clear that the 1^st Opposite Party had transferred the account without the knowledge and consent of the Complainant.  The Complainant admits that he and 2^nd Opposite Party were husband and wife and during 2008 November, they became separate by a decree of divorce.  The transfer application was given on 08.01.07 before the decree of divorce.  But transferring the joint account without the knowledge and consent of the Complainant is a deficiency in service on the part of 1^st Opposite Party.

             The other contention of the Complainant that the bank has shown deficiency by refusing cash to account holder, while he approached the bank with withdrawal slip to withdraw Rs.10,000/-.  In Ext.B1 paragraph 15, clearly says that passbook must invariably be presented for withdrawing cash by means of a withdrawal form.  The complainant ie. PW1 deposed that “ cheque, passbook   

So the above contention of the Complainant cannot be taken into account.

               The Complainant contented that due to illegal transfer of the account           the complainant was not able to meet his urgent financial needs and hence he had suffered so much of loss and hence is entitled to get Rs.75,000/- as compensation.  But the complainant has not produced any evidence to prove his loss.  Anyway it is true that he has suffered some loss and for which we assess Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.500/ as cost of the proceedings.  So we are of the opinion that the 1^st Opposite Party has shown deficiency of service by transferring the joint account to the Guruvayoor branch without the consent and knowledge of the Complainant.  So the 1^st Opposite Party is liable to restore the account in their branch   “as it was” at the time of transfer and to pay Rs.2000 as compensation to the Complainant with Rs.500/- as cost. The Complainant is entitled for the same and the order passed accordingly and the 2^nd Opposite Party is exonerated from liabilities.     

               In the result the Complaint is allowed directing the 1^st Opposite Party to    restore the account in their branch “as it was” at the time of transfer without affecting any change and to pay Rs.2000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as cost to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the Complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.

Dated this the  26^th  day of    December 2009.

Sd/-                                               Sd/-                                         Sd/-

President                                        Member                                   Member

//Forwarded by Order//

Senior Superintendent.