Delhi

South Delhi

CC/448/2012

MALKIYAT SINGH - Complainant(s)

Versus

PUNJAB NAD SINDH BANK LTD - Opp.Party(s)

30 Jan 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II UDYOG SADAN C 22 23
QUTUB INSTITUTIONNAL AREA BEHIND QUTUB HOTEL NEW DELHI 110016
 
Complaint Case No. CC/448/2012
( Date of Filing : 07 Apr 2012 )
 
1. MALKIYAT SINGH
361 TYPE -III A V NAGAR NEW DELHI
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. PUNJAB NAD SINDH BANK LTD
10A DDA SHOPPING COMPLEX DEFENCE COLONY NEW DELHI
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
  MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA PRESIDENT
  KIRAN KAUSHAL MEMBER
  UMESH KUMAR TYAGI MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 30 Jan 2023
Final Order / Judgement

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016

 

Case No. 448/2012

 

Sh. Malkiyat Singh

361, Type III,

A.V Nagar,

New Delhi

….Complainant

Versus

 

  1. Punjab and Sind Bank

10A, DDA Shopping Complex,

Defence Colony

New Delhi

 

  1. The Chief Manager

Punjab and Sind Bank

10A, DDA Shopping Complex,

Defence Colony

New Delhi

 

  1. The Chairman,

Punjab and Sind Bank

10A, DDA Shopping Complex,

Defence Colony

New Delhi

       ….Opposite Party

    

 Date of Institution    : 07.08.2012      

 Date of Order            : 30.01.2023      

 

Coram:

Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member

 

ORDER

 

 

Member: Sh. U.K. Tyagi

 

  1. Complainant has made a complaint requesting to direct Punjab and Sind Bank, Chief Manager-Punjab & Sind Bank and Chairman, Punjab & Sind Bank (hereinafter referred to as OP-1, 2 & 3 respectively) to compensate the following amounts:-
  1.      Amount deducted by OP-1 Rs.1,15,760/-
  2.       Amount of Interest calculated @ 24% from 08.09.2009 till date –  Rs.9,000/-
  3. Amount for loss of business etc. – Rs.1,50,000/-
  4. Damages for deficiency of service, mental harassment etc. – Rs.2,00,000/-

 

And to issue TDS certificate for TDS amount deducted.

  1. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

The complainant opened a fixed deposit account bearing No.257406/ 757/08 on 05.09.2008 and deposited a sum of Rs.33,00,000/- @ interest of 8.25% per annum.  The FD was for a period of 90 days.  It was stated that renewal of FD shall be automatically in case amount is not withdrawn on maturity.  The complainant fell ill and could not contact the Bank.  Meanwhile, he also lost FD’s receipt.  The same were got issued on taking indemnity bond.  On 13.8.2009, the complainant visited OP-1 branch for taking the statement of FD Account.  On the receipt of same, the complainant came to know that OP on 29.09.2008, deducted TDS of Rs.1,746/- and on 31.12.2008, TDS of Rs.4,633/-.  TDS certificates were not issued to the complainant.  On going through the said statement, the complainant came to know that the complainant had earned an interest of Rs.2,38,384/- (inclusive of TDS) during the last one year.

  1. Complainant visited on 18.08.2009 visited the branch of OP-1 and requested the official of OP-1 to renew the old FDs and transfer the interest till  date in complainant’s S/B  Account maintained at  OP-1. On 19.08.2009, the OP-1 transferred an amount of Rs. 1,94,676/- accrued on FDs and issued new FD receipt No.276920 of Rs.30,00,000/- for 12 months interest @ 7% per annum.
  2. Due to urgent need, the complainant requested to close FD and return the FD amount.  On much persuasion, the OP-1 agreed to transfer the FD amount to his S/B Account No. 1/6/108.  OP-1 on 08.09.2009 transferred a sum of Rs.28,84,240/- in the S/B Account of the complainant whereas the FD was of Rs.30,00,000/-.  The OP-1 refused to give any reason for less amount.  With the conduct of OP-1 and deficiency in service, the complainant was under continuous shock and harassment.  Hence the complaint.
  3. OPs, on the other hand, filed their consolidated reply interalia submitted preliminary objection.  The OPs mentioned that they have replied stating the reason for deductions in the said FD as per policy of OP Bank to the false legal notice served upon them.  The complainant informed the OP-1 about loss of FD No. 257406 after 8 months of the due date i.e. 06.12.2008.  New FD for the sum of Rs.30,00,000/- was issued @ 7% as the overdue interest rate depends on the period for which FDR is renewed as per Punjab & Sind Bank, circular No.2274 dated 30.08.2006.  The copy of said circular is enclosed as Annexure-3.
  4. The complainant wanted to renew the said FD for 12 months from 19.08.2009 and accordingly, the overdue interest on the said FDR was calculated as applicable on renewal of 12 months.  He was also informed that in case, he does not want to renew, no overdue interest shall be payable for the period of 256 days when his FDR was lying untraceable.  The complainant continued the renewed FDR only for 20 days as such, the overdue interest for 256 days given @ 2% and excess interest of the tune of Rs. 1,15,760/- was reverted under  the guidelines of the bank’s policy when the complainant wished to renew the FD of Rs.30 Lakhs for 12 months, the OP Bank, as per its guidelines credited the complainant’s S/B Account with the overdue interest @ 7%.  The complainant was entitled for the same, had he continued the FD for 12 months. Since the complainant after 20 days of renewal date, requested for breaking the FD for some urgent need, hence, the complainant was entitled to the overdue interest slab of only 2% for the period of 256 days.  As such, the OP Bank is entitled to rate of overdue interest as applicable on FDR.  Therefore, OPs maintained that there was no deficiency of service on their part.
  5. Both the parties filed written submissions and evidence-in-affidavits.  Written statement is on record so is rejoinder.  Oral arguments were heard and concluded.  However, the counsel for OP was not present.  Since it is an old case, hence, it was considered appropriate to conclude the arguments as written submissions of OP is on record.
  6. This Commission has gone into the material placed on record.  The guidelines/policy governing the rate of interest in such matters was also looked into.  Initially, the complainant got the FD for 90 days thereafter under the impression of automatically renewal of FDs, did not contact the OP Bank.  It was only after more than eight months that he contacted the Bank for the duplicate receipt of FD for loss of original FD.  OP-Bank again specially asked for the period of renewal of FD on 19.08.2009.  Only after the lapse of 20 days, he requested for due amount on pre mature encashment the said FD which was renewed for 12 months on 19.08.2009 @ 7%.  As per rules & guidelines of the OP Bank “if the such renewed overdue domestic term deposit is tendered for premature encashment before completion of period of 15 days from actual date of renewal, no interest be paid for the overdue period even if total overdue period from the date of maturity of old deposit receipt exceeds 15 days and overdue interest which has already been paid shall be recoverable from the party”.
  7. In view of above, the complainant was informed about the recovery of overdue interest paid in case of premature FD.  And that is why, the withdrawal of FD amount before maturity of 12 months and after 15 days of its renewal, the rate of overdue interest would got decreased from the period of 256 days i.e. from 06.12.2008 till 19.08.2009 from 7% to 2%. The same is explained lucidly in said circular of 30.08.2006.
  8. After having considered the facts as explained above, this Commission is of the considered opinion that OPs cannot be held liable for short of obligation.  The OPs have lucidly explained the policy/guidelines governing such cases of Fixed Deposits.  The Commission is convinced that there is no deficiency in services on the part of OPs. Hence complaint fails. And thereto prayer is also rejected. Further Ops are directed to issue TDS certificates if not issued earlier, immediately.

No order as to the costs.

 

File be consigned to the record room and order be uploaded on the website.                                                      

 

 

 
 
[ MONIKA A. SRIVASTAVA]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[ KIRAN KAUSHAL]
MEMBER
 
 
[ UMESH KUMAR TYAGI]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.