Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/634/2020

Smt. Ramandeep Sarang - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s South Indian Bank Ltd (SIB) - Opp.Party(s)

Manoj Kumar

17 Aug 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	634/2020
Date of Institution	:	01.12.2020
Date of Decision	:	17.08.2023

 

                                       

                       

 

Smt.Ramandeep Sarang w/o Sh.Kiran Pal r/o H.No.2363, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh

                                ...  Complainant.

Versus

M/s South Indian Bank Ltd. (SIB) through Branch Manager, SCO 2475-76, GF, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh

…. Opposite Party.

BEFORE:
	SHRI AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU,	PRESIDENT
	SHRI B.M.SHARMA	MEMBER
Present:-
	Sh.Manoj Kumar, Counsel for complainant Sh.Vishal Ahuja & Sh.C.s.Pasricha, Counsel for OPs.

       

ORDER BY AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU, M.A.(Eng.),LLM,PRESIDENT

1.         By dint of this common order, we propose to dispose off the following 4 connected consumer complaints in which common questions of law and fact are involved:-

1	2.	3.		4.
Sr. No.	C.C. No.	Complainant’s Name	Vs.	Opposite Party (s)
	634/2020	Smt.Ramandeep Sarang	Vs.	M/s South Indian Bank Ltd.
	632/2020	Sh.Jagwander Jeet	Vs.	M/s South Indian Bank Ltd.
	633/2020	Sh.Atma Singh	Vs.	M/s South Indian Bank Ltd.
	635/2020	Smt.Balwinder Kaur & Sh.Paramjit Singh	Vs.	M/s South Indian Bank Ltd.

2.         The facts are gathered from C.C.No.634/2020-Smt.Ramandeep Sarang Versus  M/s South Indian Bank Ltd.
3.         The complainant has filed the present complaint has     been filed by the special power of attorney holder Sh.Paramajit Singh pleading therein that the complainant –Smt.Ramandeep Sarang is  having bank a/c No.040405300009612 with the OP since 24.10.2017.  The complainant deposited cheque No.012144 dated 01.10.2020 for Rs.15,56,500/- with the OP, honoured on 01.10.2020 which was issued by Sh.Sandeep Singh s/o sh.Gurdeep Singh in discharge of his partial liability, also having bank a/c No. 040405300002529 with the OP Branch at Sector 22, Chandigarh. Thereafter, the complainant ensured that there is adequate balance in her account and so she issued the following cheques in discharge of her partial /complete liabilities in favour various persons as detailed under:-

Sr. No.	Dates of Issuance	Beneficiary Name	Cheque Nos.	Amount in Rs.
1	03.10.2020	Atma Singh	689818	4,90,000/-
2	03.10.2020	Jagwander Jeet	689820	2,00,000/-
3	03.10.2020	Atma Singh	689817	1,50,000/-
4	03.10.2020	Balwinder Kaur	689816	1,60,000/-
				10,00,000/-

                All the aforesaid cheques were honoured. However, one cheque bearing No.064135 dated 12.10.2020 for Rs.5,00,000/- issued to Sh.Jagwander Jeet by the complainant was dis-honoured with the returning memo dated 12.10.2020 (Annexure C-2)  having the remarks "No available Balance in the account since lien has been imposed in the account due to dispute on funds as reported by the account holder" despite the complainant was having adequate bank balance i.e. Rs.6,56,000/-.  Due to illegal act & conduct of the OPs, the complainant issued legal notice dated 12.10.2020 upon the OP. Even after receipt of the legal notice, the OP has not complied with the terms of legal notice and further bent upon to dishonour another cheque No. 689819 dated 03.10.2020 issued by the complainant to one Smt. Kirandeep for Rs.4,90,000/-, with returning memo dated 22.10.2020 with remarks "Funds Insufficient” (Annexure C-4). The complainant received text massage dated 23.10.2020 on her mobile that Rs.6,56,358/- has been transferred/debited from her account "as per opinion of Legal HO JGM MAI”. However, the details about the transferee account have not been known to the complainant. The complainant made representation dated 24.10.2020 (Annexure C-5) that how and what manner without the instructions of the complainant, amount could be transferred from her bank account or dis-honour the cheques already issued her despite having adequate bank balance into the bank account. It was further submitted in the representation/letter/notice that if any person is having any claim against complainant then also objector, may seek legal remedy but in no case opposite party is supposed to preside over any dispute and decide the legality of disputes regarding claim of any third person against the complainant. The complainant even offered affidavit in this respect and requested that the amount so transferred from the bank account of complainant be immediately re-credited into bank account and to immediately lift the lien of account/unfreeze the bank account as the OP is also supposed to follow the applicable law.  Subsequently, the OP sent legal notice dated 28.10.2020 to the complainant to give consent to transfer the amount for Rs.15,56,500/- into the bank account of Shri. Sandeep Singh on the guise of the Cheque No 012844 issued to the complainant for Rs.15,56,500/- by Shri Sandeep Singh wrongly/inadvertently got cleared because of allegedly duplication of stop payment request received from Shri Sandeep Singh by the OP. It was also claimed by the OP that they have been directed by Banking Ombudsman to transfer the amount for Rs.15,56,500/- from the account of complainant to the bank account of Shri Sandeep Singh which otherwise appears to be big lie because no such power exists with Banking Ombudsman except to give opinion or recommendation subject to legal rights of complainant. The complainant replied the said legal notice vide reply dated 10.11.2020 and denied the consent as sought by the OP and requested the OP to unfreeze the account and to re-credit the amount of Rs.6,56,358/- illegally debited from his account on 23.10.2020, but to no effect.  Further, the OP illegally transferred Rs.9,00,142/- from the account of the complainant  on 13.11.2020 without her instructions. A copy of the bank statement of the complainant is Annexure C-8. Alleging that the aforesaid acts of omission and commission on the part of the OP amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, the complainant has filed the instant complaint seeking directions to the OP to re-credit amount for Rs.6.56.358/- illegally debited on 23.10.2020 and Rs.9,00,142/- illegally debited on 13.11.2020 and to pay the interest on the aforesaid amounts @24 p.a. on the amount from the date of transfer from the account of complainant; to unfreeze the bank account of complainant; not to dishonour any cheque which may be issued in future or in case already issued by complainant to any person if again presented within the period of validity of respective cheques subject to availability of adequate balance to the credit of complainant and to pay the compensation and litigation expenses.

4.         After service of the notice, the OP has filed the written version took the preliminary objection that the complainant is not a consumer under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. It has further been stated that Sh.Sandeep Singh from whom the original cheque was encashed and payment transferred to the account of the Complainant has in fact issued a legal notice dated 28.12.2020 (Annexure OP-1) to the bank and also Ms.Ramandeep Sarang, Sh.Sandeep Singh has specifically referred to the cheques including the cheque on the basis of which the amount was transferred to Ramandeep Sarang alleging that the said cheques were lost or stolen by someone and when he came to know about these missing cheques, he immediately stopped the payment of these missing cheques. The bank vide reply dated 05.01.2021 (Annexure OP-2) stated that due to a system error the cheque bearing No. 1012844 had been inadvertently passed through clearing and on getting to know of the said mistake, the damage control and rectification was carried out.  It has been stated that in fact Sh. Sandeep Singh son of Sh.Gurdeep Singh is having its account No.5556053000002529 with Opposite Party's bank's Branch Office at Sector 22 C, Chandigarh. During the regular course of business, on opening of account by Sh. Sandeep Singh with Opposite Party's branch, he was provided with a cheque book of five leaves with Serial No. from 01012841 to 01012845, which is printed on the coloured portion of the cheque leaves. On the white strip at the bottom of the cheque leaves another series from 012841 to 012845 is printed but this is old series and no longer in use. This series used to be the cheque leaf numbers but have been currently replaced by the new series printed on the coloured portion. Inadvertently, both the series got uploaded in the Bank's CBS.  The cheque No. 01012844 dated 29.09.2020 issued by Sh Sandeep Singh son of Sh Gurdeep Singh for an amount of Rs. 15,56,500/- favouring Ms. Ramandeep Sarang was presented at Opposite Party's banks branch for encashment and the amount of Rs. 15,56,500/- was remitted to the credit of account of Smt. Ramandeep Sarang-complainant on 01.10.2020. Smt. Ramandeep Sarang also happens to be account holder of Opposite Party's bank's branch office at Sector 22 Chandigarh having account no. 0404053000009612. The said transfer of the amount from the account of Sh. Sandeep Singh to the Account of the Smt. Ramandeep Sarang even though then not in the knowledge of the bank was as a result of an innocus mistake /inadvertent error due to the duplication of entries in the system of the Opposite Party's bank wherein, the said series had been entered twice and the stop payment instructions of Sh Sandeep Singh were given effect to only one series, copy of the Screenshot regarding stop payment instructions the corresponding entry in the bank and the inadvertent uploading of both the series in the CBS are annexed as ANNEXURE OP-4 (Colly.). Thereafter, the complainant-Smt. Ramandeep Sarang simultaneously on 03.10.2020 issued four cheques favouring Sh. Atma Singh, Sh. Jagwander Jeet and Smt. Balwinder Kaur from her aforesaid account out of the amount of Rs. 15,56,500/- which was inadvertently and due to error received from the account of Sh Sandeep Singh as detailed in para 5 of the complaint.. The aforesaid four cheques aforesaid were presented over counter at Banks Chandigarh Branch at Sector 22 on 03.10.2020 and the cheque amounts were consequently transferred to the accounts of Atma Singh, Jagwander Jeet and Balwinder Kaur out of the funds i.e. the amounts of Rs. 15,56,500/- mistakenly transferred from the account of Sh Sandeep Singh son of Sh Gurdeep Singh to the account of Ms.Ramandeep Sarang.  After the above transfers, an amount of Rs. 6,56,358/- was lying in the account of Ramandeep Sarang as she had some prior balance in her account also before the credit of amount of Rs.15,56,500/-vide cheque no.1012844 dated 29.09.2020. It has further stated that the stop payment instructions were made by the Account holder i.e. Sh. Sandeep Singh online on the website of the bank on 25.09.2020 and thereafter there were no follow ups to ensure that the stop payment instructions was actually carried out by the Bank. After the encashment of the cheque on 01.10.2020 at 16:19 hours immediately after the payment had been credited into the account of the Ms. Ramandeep Sarang, Sh. Sandeep Singh raised an issue and sent an email dated 01.10.2020 with regard to the wrongful encashment of the cheque through advocate Gurpreet Singh Dhaliwal. The transfer of the amount was a bonafide mistake on the part of Opposite Party's bank and complainant and the other complainants in other connected complaints cannot get the benefit of any amount wrongly transferred from the account of Sh Sandeep Singh due to an inadvertent mistake and duplicated entry in the system and hence the money transferred to them is without any consideration. It has further stated that the said cheque which were out of the welcome kit issued to Sh.Sandeep Singh, had been entered twice but giving the series as slightly different i.e. 1012841 and 12841. The stop payment instructions were made by the Account holder i.e. Sh Sandeep Singh online via banks website on 25.09.2020 on the series ranging from 12841. Due to the said duplication in system the said cheque No.1012844 i.e. one cheque of the said series which had not been effectively blocked was inadvertently cleared by the bank and the payment made into the account of Ramandeep Sarang despite the stop payment instructions made online. It has further stated that  Sh Sandeep Singh never made any efforts to contact the branch before encashment of cheque nor gave any details to the dispute. The cheque inadvertently having been cleared, and thereafter on obtaining the complaint from Sh Sandeep Singh, the available remedial measures were carried out by the Opposite Party's bank by making debit freeze on all the accounts of complainant and complainants in connected complaints for the amount of Rs. 15,56,500/- which was wrongly & inadvertently transferred. It has further stated that the money lying in the accounts of complainant were the proceeds of the inadvertent/mistaken clearance of cheque by Opposite Party's bank from the account of Sh.Sandeep Singh due to the mistake/system error and accordingly the said amount was debit freezed and retransferred to the account of Sandeep Singh and is in debit freeze status at present. It has further stated that Sh.Sandeep Singh had registered a complaint (Annexure OP-5)  before Banking Ombudsman on 14.10.2020 for which Banking Ombudsman had directed bank to refund the amount encashed after stoppage of the cheque.  In pursuance to the directions of Banking Ombudsman, the Opposite Party's retransferred the available amount of Rs.6,56,358/- from the account of the Smt. Ramandeep Sarang to Sh Sandeep Singh and asked connected complainants to give their consent for reversal of the respective amounts transferred firstly from the account of Smt. Ramandeep Serang on 03.10.2020, to the account of the Smt.Ramandeep Sarang and thereafter to St. Sandeep Singh within a period of 15 Days. It has further stated that the said complainants of connected complaints i.e. Atma Singh, Jagwander Jeet and Smt. Balwinder Kaur failed to give consent in terms of the notice, and the Opposite Party's bank reversed the said entries which had arisen from the bonafide mistake as the benefits of an error cannot be gained by any person as the initial payment from the account of Sandeep Singh to the account of Ramandeep Sarang was as a result of an error and inadvertent mistake. It has further stated that  the OP has aced in right dirctoin in transferring the amount of Rs.9,00,142/- and Rs.6,56,358/- i.e. Rs.15,56,500/- to the account of Sh.Sandeep Singh. The remaining allegations have been denied, being false. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service on its part, the OP prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
5.         The Complainant filed replication to the written version of the OP controverting their stand and reiterating her own.
6.         The parties filed their respective affidavits and documents in support of their case.
7.         We have heard the Counsel for the contesting parties  and have gone through the documents on record.
8.         It is observed that the controversy in question involves two types of disputes, one dispute relating to civil in nature which is required to be adjudicated by the Civil Court because it requires detailed and elaborate evidence as the question of civil rights were involved in it such as loss of cheques by Sh.Sandeep Singh s/o Sh.Gurdeep Singh r/o District Ludhiana was alleged and the issues of transactions between the complainants namely Smt.Ramandeep Sarang and others advancing loan amount in friendly relations etc.  are involved. Another dispute is relating to the deficiency in service by the Bank for debiting account of the complainant(s) without her/his consent and any lawful authority to do so and unfair trade practice of freezing the account of the complainant(s) without any authority under law. Hence, both the matters though overlapping with each other yet can be separated and decided accordingly. Hence, we are dealing with the issue relating to the allegations of complainant(s) against OP for deficiency in service and adoption of unfair trade practice only. However, the parties to the complaint and others are at liberty to raise civil dispute and get it adjudicated from the concerned quarters as per law.
9.         The OP took the preliminary objection that the complainant is not a consumer under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. It is observed that the complainant is a consumer as the complainant is availing banking  services from the OP-Bank being its account holder.  The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment titled as Arun Bhatia Vs. HDFC Bank, Civil Appeal Nos.5204-5205 of 2002 held as under:-

“Banking Service-Every person seeking service from the Bank falls within the ambit of definition of ‘Consumer’ under Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019.

                So it can safely be held that the complainant is a consumer qua the OP-Bank as defined under the provisions’ of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019.

10.         The following are the main issues to decide the controversy in question:-

1.         Whether the OP wrongly and arbitrarily debited an amount of Rs.6,56,358/- on 23.10.2020 from the bank account of the complainant or not?
2.         Whether the OP wrongly and arbitrarily debited amount of Rs.9,00,142/- on 13.11.2020 from the bank account of the complainant to Sh.Sandeep Singh’s account or not?
3.         Whether the OP wrongly and arbitrarily freeze the bank account of the complainant to the extent of the credited amount?

11.         In order to find out the answers to the above said issues, the following facts and circumstances are necessary to be discussed:-

                The brief facts are that the OP-Bank served a legal notice dated 28.10.2020, which was received by the complainant on 31.10.2020 requiring the complainant to give his consent to transfer the amount of Rs.15,56,000/- into the bank account of Shri Sandeep Singh on account of the cheque No.012844 issued to the complainant for Rs.15,56,500/- by Shri Sandeep Singh wrongly inadvertently got cleared because of alleged duplication of stop payment request received from Shri Sandeep Singh by the OP. It was also claimed by the OP that the OP has been directed by Banking Ombudsman to transfer the amount of Rs.15,56,500/- from the account of the complainant to the bank account of Shri Sandeep Singh. The complainant has placed on record copy of the legal notice dated 28.10.2020 sent by the OP and reply dated 10.11.2020 to the legal notice as Annexures C-6 and C-7 respectively.

12.         The complainant replied to the legal notice dated 28.10.2020 sent by the OP vide reply dated 10.11.20200  and denied the consent as sought by the OP and further called upon the OP to immediately unfreeze her bank account and further asked them to re-credit the amount of Rs.6,56,358/- illegally debited from the bank account of the complainant on 23.10.2020. The OP has further illegally transferred Rs.9,00,142/- from the account of  the complainant on 13.11.2020 without any authority and instructions in this respect from the complainant. A copy of the bank statement of the complainant till 13.11.2020 was enclosed as Annexure C-8. Further, the OP freezed the bank account of the complainant.  
13.         The OP admitted in the written version to the complaint that they inadvertently cleared the cheque of Rs.15,56,500/- presented by the complainant namely Smt.Ramandeep Sarang, despite stop payment request made by Shri Sandeep Singh. Inadvertently, both the series got uploaded in the bank’s CBS and ‘stop payment” instructions could not be followed. The OP has not even returned the cheque of Rs.15,56,500/- before debiting the account of the complainant-Smt.Ramandeep Sarang and other persons whose bank accounts also got debited, affecting legal right of the complainant because in the absence of non-returning of the cheque to the complainant, she could not get an opportunity to avail remedy under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (as amended up-to-date).
14.         The complainant has filed the present complaint qua the OP for the deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on account of debit of the amount from the bank account of the complainant and freezing the account of the complainant wrongly and arbitrarily without the consent and instructions of the complainant as well as not following any rule/regulation or law to this effect in an unauthorized manner. The OP-Bank has failed to prove that the Bank has any authority of law or power to debit the credited amount from the account of the complainant without her consent or instructions to that effect.  Therefore, all these three issues (a) to (c) are decided in favour of the complainant as the  OP wrongly and arbitrarily debited an amount of Rs.6,56,358/- on 23.10.2020 from the bank account of the complainant  and  Rs.9,00,142/- on 13.11.2020 from the bank account of the complainant to Sh.Sandeep Singh’s account without any authority of law. Further, the OP wrongly and arbitrarily freezed the bank account of the complainant to extent of the credited amount, without any authority of law.
15.         The OP has taken the plea that the Learned Banking Ombudsman has directed the OP-Bank to refund the amount encashed after stoppage of the cheque, rather the Learned Banking Ombudsman decision was “Bank to pay as after stoppage the cheque was enchased”. So it is observed that the Learned Banking Ombudsman nowhere stated that the OP should debit the amount from the bank account of the complainant and credit the same in account of Shri Sandeep Singh.
16.         In view of the above discussion, the OP is held deficient in rendering proper services to the complainant on account of debiting the amount of Rs.6,56,358/- on 23.10.2020 and Rs.9,00,142/- on 13.11.2020 from the bank account of the complainant as well as guilty of adopting unfair trade practice for freezing the account of the complainant to the extent of the credited amount without mentioning any rule/regulation/law authorizing the OP to do so. 
17.         Almost identical facts have been pleaded in another connected complaints and similar evidence has been led in them.  Therefore, in all the consumer complaints, deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the OP is proved.
18.         For the reasons stated above, all the complaints deserve to be partly allowed and the same are  accordingly partly allowed.
19.         In C.C.No.63242020-Smt.Ramandeep Sarang Versus  M/s South Indian Bank Ltd., the OP is directed to :-

i)       re-credit amount of  Rs.6,56,358/- illegally debited on 23.10.2020 and Rs.9,00,142/- illegally debited on 13.11.2020 to the account of the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a.  from the date of respective transfers from the account of complainant till its actual date of re-credit into the account of the complainant (if the OP has not credited it till the date of decision of the present complaint).

2.   unfreeze the bank account of complainant. (If the OP has not unfreezed it till the decision of this complaint).

20.         In C.C.No.632/2020-Jagwander Jeet Versus  M/s South Indian Bank Ltd., the OP is directed to :-

1. re-credit amount of  Rs.2,00,000/- illegally debited on 13.11.2020 to the account of the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a.  from the date of transfer from the account of complainant till its actual date of re-credit into the account of the complainant, after making reverse entry to the extent of Rs.2,00,000/- from the account of Smt.Ramandeep Sarang. (if the OP has not credited it till the date of decision of the present complaint).

ii)     unfreeze the bank account of complainant. (If the OP has not unfreezed it till the decision of this complaint).

21.         In C.C.No.633/2020-Atma Singh Versus  M/s South Indian Bank Ltd., the OP is directed to :-

1. re-credit amount of  Rs.6,40,000/- illegally debited on 13.11.2020 to the account of the complainant along with interest @ 6% p.a.  from the date of transfer from the account of complainant till its actual re-credit into the account of the complainant, after making reverse entry to the extent of Rs.6,40,000/- from the account of Smt.Ramandeep Sarang. (if the OP has not credited it till the date of decision of the present complaint).

ii)      unfreeze the bank account of complainant. (If the OP has not unfreezed it till the decision of this complaint).

22.         In C.C.No.635/2020-Smt.Balwinder Kaur and Another Versus  M/s South Indian Bank Ltd., the OP is directed to :-

1. re-credit amount of  Rs.1,60,000/- illegally debited on 13.11.2020 to the account of the complainants along with interest @ 6% p.a.  from the date of transfer from the account of complainants till its actual re-credit into the account of the complainants, after making reverse entry to the extent of Rs.1,60,000/- from the account of Smt.Ramandeep Sarang. (if the OP has not credited it till the date of decision of the present complaint).
2. unfreeze the bank account of complainant. (If the OP has not unfreezed it till the decision of this complaint).

23.         This order be complied with by the OP within 60 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy.
24.         The pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of accordingly.
25.         Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission 17/08/2023
	Sd/- (AMRINDER SINGH SIDHU) PRESIDENT
	Sd/- (B.M.SHARMA) MEMBER