IN THE CONSUMER DISUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATHANATHITTA

Dated this the 13^th  day of May, 2010.

Present : Sri. Jacob Stephen (President):

Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member)

                                                  Sri. N. Premkumar (Member)

C.C.No.74/07 (Filed on 18.06.2007)

Between:

The Managing Trustee,

Karunalayam Roral Poor Charitable &

Educational Trust having at:

Archana Hospital Complex,

M.C. Road, Pandalam,

Pathanamthitta Dist.

(By Adv. R. Chandran)                                                                        …..  Complainant.

And:

1.      M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd.,

Sales Hub, 1^st Floor,

Potanickal Building,

Market Road, Edappally.P.O.,

Kochi – 682 024.

2.       The Manager,

 ICICI Bank Ltd.,

 Pathanamthitta Branch,

 Aban Arcade,

 Pathanamthitta.

(By Adv. Mammen Pappy Adeneth)                                                  …..Opposite parties.

O R D E R

Sri. N. Premkumar (Member):

                        Complainant filed this complaint for getting a relief from the Forum. 

            2. Fact of the case in brief is as follows.  Complainant is a public Charitable Trust, named Karunalayam Rural Poor Charitable and Educational Trust registered under the Indian Trust Act.  The said Trust has represented by its Managing Trustee.  The 1^st opposite party is a banking company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and doing banking business as per the provisions of Banking Regulation Act.  2^nd opposite party is the Chief Manager of the Pathanamthitta Branch of the 1^st opposite party.  The 3^rd opposite party is the authorized officer of the said bank.

                        3. The 3^rd opposite party has approached the complainant for opening an account in its name and accordingly the complainant submitted all the documents.  The documents include a resolution signed by the trustees, which is in the format provided by 3^rd opposite party, which was not duly filled up and contained unfilled columns/paragraphs.  The 3^rd opposite party has also got signed unfilled application form of the opposite party bank from the complainant assuring that the same would be filled up at the Bank’s end.

                        4. Complainant was informed by the opposite parties that an account in the name of complainant is opened by the Bank as A/c.No.02160500176.  The said account is opened without depositing any amount/with a zero balance.  Thereafter the 3^rd opposite party approached the complainant and requested for a deposit in the bank in order to help the opposite parties to achieve their deposit target for the financial year ending 31.3.06.  As per the said request the complainant has issued a cheque for Rs.5,00,000/- purely as deposit in the above account as per the request made by the 3^rd opposite party.  The complainant has not requested or opted for any facilities including over draft/cash credit or no such facilities.

                        5. The complainant has noticed from the summary of accounts dated 31.3.06 that opposite parties have deducted an amount of Rs.830/- alleged to be as clearing charges.  The opposite parties are not entitled to get the charges.  The above matter was brought to the notice of the 3^rd opposite party who in turn informed the complainant that the same is only due to an oversight and the said entry in the account would be reversed.  From the summary of accounts as on 31.7.06 the complainant has noticed that an amount of Rs.6,583/- is charged and deducted towards the alleged RCA charges for June, 2006.  Since no facility is available by the complainant and no such facility was provided to the complainant, the opposite parties have no manner of right to charge any RCA charges is in the above said account.  That apart the opposite parties compelled the complainant to remit an amount of Rs.2,000/- in the above said account for honouring a cheque issued by the complainant.  But the complainant had sufficient balance in the said account to honour the cheque when these aspects were brought to the notice of the 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties, the 3^rd opposite party informed the complainant, it is due to a mistake in the system and the same would be rectified soon.  But opposite parties 2 and 3 had going on charging the account of the complainant with RCA charges, without caring to fulfill the assurances and undertaking given by them.

                        6. Complainant has issued a lawyers notice dated 17.11.06 to opposite parties, calling upon them to close the account of the complainant with referred of an amount of Rs.6,862-15, illegally or deducted from the account.  The said notice was received by opposite parties 2 and 3.  On receipt of the said notice they repeated the same assurances and requested the complainant to maintain the account without any charges.  Accordingly the complainant opted to maintain the account as an ordinary account without any charges.  Even after this also the opposite parties went on charging the above said account with RCA charges.  There upon the complainant issued another lawyer’s notice on 23.2.07 calling upon the opposite parties to inform the compliance of the lawyers notice dated 17.12.06 and informing than that in case of failure on their part for the compliance appropriate action would be initiated by the complainant.  On receipt of the above said notice the 1^st opposite party sent a reply dated 6.3.07 stating that the opposite parties are not in a position to accede to the requests stated above.  It also stated in the said notice that they replied the lawyer’s notice on 11.12.06.  But in fact they not replied.

                        7. The above said acts of the opposite parties are illegal, arbitrary totally against banking norms and principles and amounts to gross deficiency in services and unfair trade practice.  Hence this complaint for getting the refund an amount of Rs.6,812/-.15 with compensation and cost.

                        8. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version stating that complaint is not maintainable.  The account number stated in this complaint is false and there is no such account with the 2^nd opposite party.  Without the actual account number, it is impossible to trace out the account with the branch.  The entire business is done with account number world wide.  The identity of the customer can be traced out the branch only with the original account number and there is no proxy numbers.  It is hard task to trace out the name and address of the customer as they have a unique account number that can identify them and do business at any branches of ICICI Bank Ltd world wide.  The bank provides are banking facilities, net banking, mobile banking, anywhere banking, debit cum ATM card etc.  Thus the complainant is a stronger to the opposite parties only considering the said account number.  As such, the opposite parties are not necessary parties to this litigation and are only dragged into this complaint unnecessarily.  Without the exact account number, the account holder cannot be identified and it is quite impossible to narrate the version to the complaint.  The opposite parties do not deny that the complainant does not have any account with them.  Using the account number mentioned in the complaint, the opposite parties could not trace such a customer.

                        9. As per the averment in the complaint, the complainant was having a platinum account with the bank, which should retain a Quarterly Average Balance (QAB) of Rs.5,00,000/.  If the quarterly average balance is not maintained by the account holder, the bank would deduct certain charges for the facilities, the bank provides to the customer.  It comes under the charges of non-maintainability of the account.  Such amounts are not refundable as it is the terms and conditions of the bank and the customer.  This does not come under the purview of deficiency in service or unfair trade practice.  The deduction of amount from the account for non-maintainability of Quarterly Average Balance in the account is done by the consent of the customer and also it is the part of the policy of the bank to which every customer and also it is the part of the policy of the bank to which every customer is liable.

                        10. The complainant has come with unclean hands by suppressing the material facts.  The complainant, to hide his evil motivated design and created false story and has implicated the opposite parties in this complaint.  Therefore the opposite parties canvassed for the dismissal of the complaint with compensatory cost.

                        11. From the above pleadings, following points are raised for consideration: 

(1)   Whether the complaint is maintainable before the Forum?

                               (2) Whether the reliefs sought for in the complaint are allowable?

(3)   Relief and Cost?

             12. Evidence of the complaint consists of the proof affidavit filed by the complainant along with certain documents.  Documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 and A2(a).  Evidence of opposite parties consists of the proof affidavit along with certain documents.  Documents produced were marked as Ext.B1 series.  During the trial opposite party was deleted as per the request of complainant.  After the closure of evidence, both parties were heard.

            13. Point Nos.1 to 3:-  In order to prove the complainant’s case, complainant filed proof affidavit along with certain documents.  Documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 and A2.  Ext.A1 is the copy of advocate notice sent to 2^nd and 3^rd opposite parties.  Ext.A2 and A2(a) are the acknowledgment cards of Ext.A1.

            14. In order to prove the opposite parties contention, the 2^nd opposite party filed proof affidavit along with certain documents.  Document produced were marked as Ext.B1 series.  Ext.B1 series are the copy of application form etc. of the complaint for opening the current account No.02160500176.

            15. On the basis of the averment and contention of the parties we have perused the entire materials on record.  It is admitted that complainant has an account in opposite party’s bank and deposited an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-.  The Complainant’s case is that opposite parties deducted an amount of Rs.6,812.15 illegally from his account in the form of clearing charges and RCA charges.  According to opposite parties, if the quarterly average balance is not maintained by the account holder, they would deduct certain charges for the customer.  Such amounts are not refundable as per the terms and conditions of the bank and complainant also given consent for the same.  It is a part of the policy of the bank to which every customer is liable.

            16. On a perusal of Ext.A1, it is evident that complainant does not authorized the opposite parties to deduct either clearing charge or RCA charges.

            17. Even though opposite parties produced Ext.B1 series, it would not disclose that complainant has authorized the opposite parties to deduct any amount.  Though the claim the deduction of certain charges for their facilities to customers, but failed to adduce any material to prove that what facilities they provided to the complainant.  Deducting any amount without consent or approval is illegal, unfair, arbitrary, malafide and against the spirit of consumer justice.  It is not only a clear deficiency of service but an unfair trade practice also.  Therefore, this complaint is allowable with reasonable compensation and cost.

            18. In the result, complaint is allowed, thereby the opposite parties are directed to refund the deducted amount of Rs.6,862-15 deducted from the complainant’s account.  The complainant is also allowed to realize Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand five hundred only) as compensation and Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One Thousand five hundred only) as cost from opposite parties.  The amount so awarded is to be given to the complainant within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the whole amount will follow interest at the rate of 12% per annum from this date till the realization of the whole amount.

            Declared in the Open Forum on this the 13^th day of May, 2010.                                                                                                                                                                                   (Sd/-)                                                                                                                                          N. Premkumar,

                                                                                                                                        (Member)

Sri. Jacob Stephen (President)                                :           (Sd/-)

Smt. C. Lathika Bhai (Member)                              :           (Sd/-)

Appendix:

Witness examined on the side of the complainant:  Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant:

A1       :  Copy of advocate notice dated17.11.06 sent by the complainant to the 2^nd and 

               3^rd opposite parties. 

A2 & A2(a)     :  Acknowledgment cards of Ext.A1.

Witness examined on the side of the opposite parties:  Nil.

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties:

B1 series        :  Photocopy of the application form for Roaming Current Account.

                                                                                                                        (By Order)

                                                                                                              Senior Superintendent

Copy to:  (1)  The Managing Trustee, Karunalayam Rural Poor Charitable & Educational   

                       Trust , Archana Hospital Complex, M.C. Road, Pandalam,

                       Pathanamthitta Dist.

(2)    M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd., Sales Hub, 1^st Floor, Potanickal Building,

           Market Road, Edappally.P.O., Kochi – 682 024.

(3)    The Manager,  ICICI Bank Ltd.,  Pathanamthitta Branch,  Aban Arcade,

           Pathanamthitta.

   (4)   The stock file.