Haryana

Bhiwani

CC/797/2019

Basau - Complainant(s)

Versus

PNB - Opp.Party(s)

Reena Sharma

27 Feb 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHIWANI.

                                                           

                    Complaint Case No. :        797 of 2019

                                                                       Date of Institution    :  30.09.2019

                                                                      Date of Decision      :        27.02.2024

 

 

 

Basau son of Sh. Chandgi Ram R/o House NO.880, village Pur, Tehsil Bawani Khera, District Bhiwani.

 

              ..…Complainant.

 

  Versus

 

 

Punjab National Bank, Bawani Khera, Tehsil Bawani Khera, District Bhiwani

through its Branch Manager.

                                                  .…Opposite Parties

 

   

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection  Act, 1986.

 

                                                               

 

 

BEFORE:     Mrs. Saroj Bala Bohra, Presiding Member.

Ms. Shashi Kiran Panwar, Member.

 

Present:-       Ms. Reena Sharma, Advocate for complainant.

Sh. Manoj Kumar, Adv. for OP (defence struck off).

         

ORDER

 

Saroj Bala  Bohra, Presiding Member.

 

1.                 Brief facts of the present complaint are that mother of complainant Smt. Sumitra deposited a sum of Rs.12,184/- on 26.02.1994 vide FDR No.QYN-895178 having date of maturity as 27.06.2001 with OP.  She also got deposited Rs.48,000/- on 24.03.1994 vide FDR No.QYN 895197 having date of maturity as 24.03.1995. The maturity amount for both the FDRs were Rs.92,726/-.  As per complainant, after maturity date, he visited the office of OP to pay the FDRs amount but they did not pay any heed to the genuine request of complainant despite approaching them through RTI on 15.06.2019 and appeal thereunder.  Hence, the present complaint has been preferred by complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of OP thereby causing him mental agony, harassment, humiliation and monetary loss.  In the end, complainant has prayed that the OP may be directed to pay a sum of Rs.92,726/- alongwith interest @18%  till its realization. Further to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of harassment besides Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses. Any other relief, to which this Commission deems fit has also been sought.

2.                 Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel but failed to file written statement despite availing sufficient opportunities, so the defence of OP was struck off vide order dated 24.04.2023.

3.                 On behalf of complainant, his affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-2 have been tendered in evidence and then closed the same.

4.              We have heard final arguments and gone through the entire record minutely.

5.                 Complainant deposited Rs.12,184/- on 26.02.1994 vide Ex. C-1 having date of maturity as 27.06.2001 and Rs.48,000/- on 24.03.1994 vide Ex. C-2 having date of maturity as 24.03.1995 with OP No.1 in the shape of FDRs.  Further perusal of these FDRs reveal that the amounts on maturity was coming to Rs.39,744/- and Rs.52,982/- respectively i.e. a total  sum of Rs.92,726/-.  The grievance of the complainant is that the OP has not released the maturity amount despite various requests and visits to them as well as information sought under RTI (Annexures-1 & Annexure-2).  Thus counsel for complainant has argued that the complainant has been harassed by the act of OP and also suffering monetary loss.

6.                 From the above, it is observed that  the aforesaid amounts were deposited by complainant with OP 2 but the maturity amount thereof was not paid by the OP to the complainant. The OP has no justification, to withhold the maturity amount of the complainant. We are of the considered view that the OP has utterly failed to perform their part of obligations.  It is pertinent to mention here that the OP, even after the filing of this complaint and during the pendency of this complaint, have not shown any interest to release the maturity amount to the complainant.  In view of the aforesaid discussion, we conclude that there has been lapse and deficiency on the part of the OP while delivering services to the complainant which has caused mental and physical harassment to the complainant as well as monetary loss. Hence the complaint is allowed and OPis directed to comply with the following directions with 40 days from the date of passing of this order:-

(i)       To pay a sum of Rs.92,726/- (Rs. Ninety two thousand seven hundred twenty six). to the complainant alongwith simple interest @ 9% per annum from the date of maturity of the FDRs till its actual realization subject to fulfilling necessary formalities, if any, by complainant.

 

(ii)      To pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand) for deficiency in service and compensation for harassment.

(iii)     Also to pay Rs.5500/- (Rs.Five thousand five hundred) as litigation expenses.

                              In case of default, the aforementioned all the amounts shall further attract simple interest @ 12% per annum for the period of default.

                              Further, if this order is not complied with, then the complainant shall be entitled to the execution petition under section 71 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and in that eventuality, the opposite party may also be liable for prosecution under Section 72 of the said Act which envisages punishment of imprisonment, which may extend to three years or fine upto rupees one lac or with both.  Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules.  File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. 

Announced.

Dated:27.02.2024