Delhi

New Delhi

CC/790/2014

Venkat M Komaragiri - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. UCO Bank - Opp.Party(s)

10 Apr 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC.790/2014                                                                    Dated:

In the matter of:

Venkat M Komaragiri,

22-A, Ganesh Nagar Extn.II,

Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092.

                           ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

UCO Bank,

Supreme Court Compound,

1, Tilak Marg,

New Delhi-110001.

                        Opposite Party

 

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant was having Saving Bank account holder bearing No.02070110009659 since 2008 with OP Bank which was frozen w.e.f. 13.5.2014.  The complainant was having an unsecured loan from 9.6.2010 with the OP Bank and the regular instalments starting from 13.8.2010 were consistently debited from the complainant’s saving bank account till 6.5.2014.  After 6.5.2014, OP  neither debited nor allowed the complainant to use the Saving Bank Account till 10.10.2014 even though he was never a defaulter.

2.     In the month of April 2014, the complainant kept his salary unutilized due to marriage of his daughter scheduled for 30^th May 2014.  On 14.5.2014, when the complainant wanted to draw cash from ATM, the cash could not be disbursed, rather, he received a slip from ATM stating “Unauthorized user”.  Complainant made NEFT from OP Bank to Indian Overseas Bank for a sum of Rs.8,600/- on 3.1.2013 but the same was also returned without assigning any reason and the penalty of Rs.350/- was levied by Bajaj Fin.serve due to return of ECS.  A sum of Rs.8,100/- was debited from the complainant’s account on 6.4.2011, reasons were not stated.  Complainant was informed by the OP through its letter dated 16.5.2014 that his account was freezed on the basis of communication sent by the SBCA immediately after tendering his resignation. Complainant requested OP bank to foreclose his personal loan account by waiving the interest levied as on 16.5.2014 through the amount lying in the savings bank account, but  the OP bank refused to do so.

3.     The SCBA has not released complainant’s final retirement benefits till 8.10.2014  whereas the resignation was approved on 12.5.2014.   A total sum of Rs.2,693/ has been debited from the complainant’s saving bank account stating that the interest was charged during the period of which the saving bank account was freezed.  OP bank received a sum of Rs.41,309/- directly from the SCBA against the complainant’s retirement benefits.  No information was given to the complainant in this regard till 10.10.2014, the OP bank deducted the outstanding loan suo motto from the amount received from SCBA and defreezed his account on 10.10.2014.   The OP bank arbitrarily settled the outstanding against the loan disbursed, this act of OP amounts to deficiency in  service,  complainant, therefore, approached this Forum for redressal of his grievance.

 4.     Consequent upon the receipt of complaint notice was sent to the OP.  Despite service, none appeared on behalf of OP, hence, it was ordered to be proceeded ex-parte on 5.2.2015 by our predecessor Bench

5.     Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit. 

6.     We have heard arguments advanced at the Bar and have perused the record.

7.     Perusal of the letter dated 13.5.2014 of SCBA  placed on record shows that there was  an outstanding balance of Rs.38,824/- on loan account No.02070610005422 of the complainant.  The complainant had also borrowed loan, from the SCBA, as per the SCBA loan ledger, there was an outstanding of Rs.68,058.30/- as on 1.5.2014.  As per the communication received from SCBA that the complainant has resigned on 12.5.2014, his account  was freezed and the intimation of the same was given to the complainant by the OP bank vide  letter dated 16.5.2014 and further the complainant was requested to clear his loan account  at the earliest so  that No Dues Certificate be given to SCBA for finalization of the retirement benefit. The account was freezed to secure the loan taken by the complainant from the OP bank, due to the resignation by complainant from SCBA.  The SCBA transferred an amount of Rs.41,309/- to the OP’s bank from which loan account was settled by OP bank and the account of the  complainant was defreezed on 10.10.14. 

8.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the account of the complainant was freezed by OP bank to secure the loan taken by the complainant, does not amounts to deficiency in services against OP Bank. The present complaint is devoid of merit, same is hereby dismissed

 

Copy of the order may be forwarded  to  the complainant to the case free of cost as statutorily required. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.

 

Announced in open Forum on 10/04/2019.

 

 

                                                    (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

              PRESIDENT

 

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                            (H M VYAS)

                  MEMBER                                                        MEMBER