BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 320 of 2021
Date of Institution: 22.11.2021
Date of Order : 28.03.2024
Monika Malik wife of Shri Rajesh Kumar, D-17 University Campus, CDLU Sirsa, now Associate Professor Department of Law, Central University of Law Mahendergarh, Mobile No. 94163-88229.
……Complainant.
Versus
- Punjab National Bank, 7, Bhikhaji Cama Place, New Delhi- 1100066 through its Managing Director.
- Assistant General Manager, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, Sirsa, Tosham Road, Hisar.
- Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Ch. Devi Lal University Branch, Sirsa (previously known as Oriental Bank of Commerce).
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR………..PRESIDENT
MRS. SUKHDEEP KAUR…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Ajay Bansal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Sahil Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs).
2. In brief, the case of complainant is that that Punjab National Bank is a Body Corporate having separate legal entity which can be sued in its Corporate name and with effect from 1.4.2020 all the Branches of Oriental Bank of Commerce in India stood merged with Punjab National Bank. That complainant is having account No. 15173031015809 in the erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce i.e. op no.3. On 8.10.2015, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in a fixed deposit account for a period of one year i.e. from 8.10.2015 to 8.10.2016 with maturity amount of Rs.5,39,891/- payable to the complainant on due date. The FDR is bearing no.TDR/MTLE 2539249. It is further averred that the complainant instructed op no.3 to renew the same after due date of maturity and op no.3 gave categorical assurance to her that the FDR would be renewed in case the customer does not apply for withdrawal of maturity amount on due date irrespective of the fact whether he/she applies for the same. That on 10.10.2019 i.e. after completion of four years of maturity of FDR, the complainant requested to transfer the maturity amount with up to date interest on FDRs in her saving bank account. The Manager, however expressed his inability to transfer the same due to the failure of network at that time and assured the complainant that amount will be transferred immediately on resumption of network. It is further averred that complainant was surprised and shocked to see a message on her mobile for the transfer of amount of maturity amounting to Rs.5,96,123/- which was very less than the amount to be paid after completion of four years of FDR. On being approached to op no.3, the complainant was told that she has been paid the rate of interest of FDR for initial one year i.e. up to 8.10.2016 and for the remaining three years, the interest has been paid at the rate of savings. The op no.3 apologized for the mistake of his employees and gave assurance to pay the interest at the rate of FDR for the whole period of four years and that remaining amount would be transferred to her saving bank account. Despite such assurance, the balance amount of interest applicable on FDR still has not been transferred despite the repeated visits of complainant personally or through her representatives. The op no.3 has been putting of the matter on one pretext or the other and on lame excuses. That as per Bank regulations/ rules, the FDR is automatically renewed in case the customer does not approach for en-cashing the same. Thus, the action of op no.3 in releasing amount of FDR with interest at the rate of savings instead of FDR rate is contrary to the Rules and Regulations, arbitrary and amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service and complainant has been harassed and she has suffered mental agony. The ops no.1 and 2 are also liable in the matter for the reasons stated above. That complainant is entitled to interest applicable on FDR for remaining three years because the money remained in fixed deposit for whole four years and also to compensation for mental harassment and agony. It is further averred that complainant also got served a legal notice upon ops on 13.8.2020 vide registered post, however, ops gave a vague reply to the said notice. Hence, this complaint.
3. On notice, ops appeared and filed written statement taking certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that a false story has been concocted by complainant. The complainant had never given any alleged instructions to op no.3 and no alleged assurance was ever given by op no.3 to the complainant. As per provisions, every depositor would have to apply for renewal of his/ her FDR like securities etc. from time to time. The complainant never made any request to op no.3 about the renewal of her FDR. It is further submitted that as per request of the consumer, FDR was closed and amount was transferred to her saving account. That as per the instructions and guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India, it has been decided that if a Term Deposit matures and proceeds are unpaid, the amount left unclaimed with the bank shall attract rate of interest as applicable to savings account or the contracted rate of interest on the matured TD, whichever is lower. In the present case, the complainant has neither renewed the Fixed/ Term deposit nor has withdrawn the amount lying deposited therein and thus in view of aforesaid instructions and guidelines of RBI, the simple interest was calculated upon the deposited amount for the period of its maturity i.e. after 08.10.2016 and the ops bank have already paid one year interest on FDR as per agreed rate and for remaining three years, the ops bank have paid interest as applicable to saving accounts as per RBI rules and guidelines and now no amount of interest or any other has been left towards the ops. In this way, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the ops towards the complainant and even the ops have not indulged in any alleged unfair trade practice with the complainant and complainant has not suffered from any alleged mental pain and agony etc. It is further submitted that notice was duly replied by the ops vide reply dated 01.10.2020 but the complainant has filed the present false and frivolous complaint against the ops in order to extract money from the ops under the guise of present false complaint. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered her affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C9.
5. On the other hand, ops have tendered affidavit of Sh. Sumit Kamboj, Branch Manager as Ex.R1 and documents Ex.R2 and Ex.R3.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
7. From the record placed on file, it is evident that complainant is having her account with op no.3 bank. On 8.10.2015, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in fixed deposit account for a period of one year i.e. from 8.10.2015 to 8.10.2016 and maturity amount of Rs.5,39,891/- was payable to the complainant on due date of maturity by the ops as is evident from deposit receipt Ex.C7. The complainant has alleged that complainant instructed op no.3 to renew the same after due date of maturity and op no.3 gave assurance to her that FDR would be renewed in case she does not apply for withdrawal of maturity amount on due date irrespective of the fact whether she applies for the same. On 10.10.2019 i.e. after completion of four years of maturity of FDR, the complainant requested to transfer the maturity amount with up to date interest on FDR in her saving bank account. According to complainant, she has been paid an amount of Rs.5,96,123/- and rate of interest on fixed deposit has been given to her for only one year and for remaining three years, she has been paid interest at the rate of savings. On the other hand, ops have denied the allegations of complainant in toto and they have averred that as per provisions, every depositor would have to apply for renewal of his/ her FDR like securities etc. from time to time and complainant never made any request to the op no.3 about the renewal of her FDR. They have further asserted that as per request of customer, FDR was closed and amount was transferred to her saving account. The ops have also placed on file a Circular of the RBI dated 02.07.2021 as Ex.R3 which stipulates that if a Term Deposit matures and proceeds are unpaid, the amount left unclaimed with the bank shall attract rate of interest as applicable to savings account or the contracted rate of interest on the matured TD, whichever is lower. In the reply to the legal notice Ex.C9 also the bank replied to the complainant that as per the Bank guidelines issued by Head Office, if the depositor does not opt for renewal of overdue term deposit interest would be paid at saving bank rate of interest as applicable from time to time and interest would be calculated on simple basis and would be payable w.e.f. 22.8.2008 or the date of maturity whichever is later for the overdue period alongwith the maturity proceeds of the matured term deposits. It is further mentioned in the reply to the legal notice, that in this case no mandate was given by complainant for renewal of the term deposit on maturity. The complainant has not placed on file any guidelines of the RBI whereby FDR is automatically renewed by the banks. Whereas bank has categorically mentioned in its reply that there is guidelines to the bank issued by Head Office that if the depositor does not opt for renewal of overdue term deposit, interest would be paid at saving bank rate of interest as applicable from time to time and interest would be calculated on simple basis and would be payable w.e.f. 22.8.2008 or the date of maturity whichever is later for the overdue period alongwith maturity proceeds of the matured term deposits. It is further mentioned by ops in their reply to the notice as well as in the written version, that no mandate was given by complainant for renewal of the term deposit on maturity. The complainant has been paid rate of interest of FDR for one year for which she got deposited the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in fixed deposit and as she did not instruct op no.3 to renew the FDR, so interest was given to her on saving rate of interest for three years and accordingly an amount of Rs.5,96,123/- was credited in her saving account. Admittedly the complainant got deposited the above said amount in FDR for one year and as such it cannot be said at all that said FDR was to be renewed further for a period of three years without any request of complainant. In the deposit receipt Ex.C7, it is clearly mentioned that facility of renewal with retrospective effect is not available to overdue deposit(s) after 14 days from date of maturity and as such complainant was to get renewed her FDR. However, the complainant has failed to prove on record that she made any request to the bank officials for renewal of FDR for further period of three years. As such, complainant is not entitled to interest of FDR for further period of three years and she has already been paid interest as applicable to the saving account and as such complaint of complainant deserves dismissal.
8. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and accordingly, same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the complainant as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member President,
Dated: 28.03.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
