BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.151 of 2017

Date of Instt. 17.05.2017

Date of Decision: 20.03.2018

Dr. Preet Arora Age 33 years D/o Jagjit Singh R/o H.No.405, Dashmesh Nagar, Kharar-140301, Distt. Mohali (Punjab)

Through Attorney: Jagjit Singh, Age 66 years S/o Gian Singh R/o H. No.405, Dashmesh Nagar, Kharar-140301, Distt. Mohali (Punjab), Mob. No.9814751994

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab National Bank, G.T. Road, Phagwara (Kapurthala) Through its Branch Manager/Authorized Representative.

2. Punjab National Bank, Bank Enclave Branch, Jalandhar City. Through its Dy. Manager/Sr. Manager/Authorized Representative.

3. Punjab National Bank, H.O. Bikaji Cama Palace, New Delhi, Through its Chief Manager/Authorized Representative.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Harvimal Dogra (Member)

Present: Sh. Jagjit Singh, Attorney of the Complainant.

Sh. Manmohan Sharma, Adv Counsel for OP No.1 to 3.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint is filed by the complainant through her attorney Sh. Jagjit Singh S/o Gian Singh. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has a Saving Bank Account No.0383000400018023 with the OP No.1 and as such, she is the consumer of the OP. The above said account was open before marriage with OP No.1. The marriage of the complainant was solemnized on 20.12.2014, but the complainant never desired to add the name of her husband (Gurveer Singh) in said account and as such, the said account stands in single name of the complainant. The name of the complainant's husband Gurveer Singh is neither mentioned in the record of OP No.1 and 2 nor in said account. The complainant has a matrimonial dispute with her husband Gurveer Singh S/o Randhir Singh R/o 216/5, Kasba Mohalla Dasuya, Distt. Hoshiarpur, Punjab and the litigation is pending in the Court at Kharar, Distt. Mohali (Punjab).

2. That the OP No.2 gave the bank account statement of complainant to above said Gurveer Singh, whereas Gurveer Singh has no connection or concern with the bank account of the complainant nor his name is mentioned anywhere in the record with the OP No.1 and 2. This account was personal, secret and private account of the complainant, which the OP No.2 in connivance of OP No.1disclosed it. Hence, the OP No.2 disclosed the privacy of the bank account of the complainant to third person. Taking advantage for disclosure the privacy of the complainant's account from OP No.2, the said Gurveer Singh presented the said bank statement of complainant in the Court at Kharar, which caused a lot of mental agony, disturbance and harassment due to disclosure the privacy of the bank account statement of the complainant. The complainant raised objection for the disclosure and issuance of bank statement to third person, the complainant gave complaint to OP No.1 and also sought information through RTI from OP No.1, which employee of bank disclosed complainant's bank account statement and under which rule the bank statement of the complainant's account was disclosed and given to third person and ultimately, it was informed to the complainant that the said information was supplied by OP No.2, but no action was taken by the concerned employee, by the bank and even complaint was made also to the police, but remained in vain and as such, the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to give compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- for mental tension and harassment and further be directed to pay cost of litigation of Rs.5000/- and be also directed to pay cost of correspondence application/complaints and visits to concerned offices i.e. Rs.5000/-.

3. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, OP No.1 filed its separate reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objection that the complainant has not alleged any negligence or unfair trade practice or deficiency in service in the complaint against the OPs, thus there is no negligence, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and therefore, complaint is liable to be dismissed and further averred that the present complaint is not maintainable against the answering OP No.1 and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed and further stated that no cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the complaint against the answering OP No.1 and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed and further submitted that no monetary loss has been caused to the complainant, as such, she is not entitled to any relief and even this Forum has got no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint. On merits, the contents of the complaint reply in the manner, it is a matter of record, but the facts of the remaining para are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

4. OP No.2 and 3 filed their separate reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complainant has not alleged any negligence or unfair trade practice or deficiency in service against the OPs and as such, this complaint is not maintainable and even no cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the instant complaint against answering OP, therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed and further alleged that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. On merits, the paras of the complaint are reply in the manner i.e. matter of record, but remaining contents of the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, Attorney of the complainant tendered into evidence two affidavits of the complainant Ex.CA and Ex.CB alongwith some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C21 and closed the evidence.

6. Similarly, counsel for OP No.1 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP/A and closed the evidence of the OP No.1 and similarly, counsel for the OP No.2 and 3 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP/B and closed the evidence.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8. After considering the plea of both the parties, we find that the case of the complainant to the effect that the complainant is having Saving Bank Account bearing No.0383000400018023 with the OP No.1, in her individual capacity that it is also admitted by the OP No.2 and 3 in its reply that copy of the statement of account was supplied to the husband of the complainant on his request that his wife is not feeling well and statement of account is required urgently and said Gurveer Singh husband of the complainant assured that he will supply the written request of his wife and due to this reason, the statement of account supplied to the husband of the complainant, when the facts in regard to supply of the copy of statement of account is admitted by OP, then it needs not to be proved by the complainant and question remains only whether the copy of the statement of account can be supplied to any person except the account holder, regarding that the answer is in negative form? because the account in the bank is a secret one and it cannot be disclosed to any one except to the account holder, regarding that the complainant has produced on the file letter of the Reserve Bank of India, which are Ex.C-13 and Ex.C-15, whereby they gave assurance to the complainant that appropriate action will be taken against the guilty person, but as per the version of the complainant, no action has been taken against the employee of OP No.2. The department action either to be taken by the OP against the concerned official or not, is a separate question, we are to adjudge and conclude whether there is any harassment to the complainant due to the negligence committed by the OP, apparently in this case, the complainant has Saving Account in the bank of the OP and she is a consumer and when the statement of account was supplied to any third person, which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant, which is also a deficiency in service on the part of the OP, therefore, the complainant is entitled for the compensation.

9. We have also considered the submission of the learned counsel for the OPs that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, but the counsel for the OPs miserably failed to explain how and under what circumstances, this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint because the statement of account was supplied to the Punjab National Bank, Branch Jalandhar City, if so then, this Forum has a jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. So, accordingly, there is no substances in the argument of the counsel for the OPs in regard to jurisdiction, therefore, this question is not sustainable.

10. In the light of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OP No.2 is directed to pay compensation for mental harassment to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.15,000/- and also directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The complaint of the complainant qua OP No.1 and 3 is dismissed. OP No.2 is further directed to compliance the order within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order, failing which the complainant will entitle to get interest on the aforesaid compensation and litigation expenses amounts of Rs.20,000/- @ 9% per annum from the date of filing complaint, till realization. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

11. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

20.03.2018 Member President