Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/848/2010

Krishna Devi W/o Saral Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab National Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Tarun Rohilla

08 Oct 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR

                                                                                              Complaint No. 84 8 of  2010.

                                                                                              Date of institution: 10.9.2010

                                                                                              Date of decision: 8.10.2015.

Krishna Devi aged about 65 years wife of Sh. Saral Kumar, resident of H. No. 2522, Sri Nagar Colony, State Bank of India, Ambala Road, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 …Complainant.

                                    Versus

1. Punjab National Bank, Bilaspur, Tehsil Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar, through its Manager. 
2. Punjab National Bank, 16 Bhikaji Cama Palace, New Delhi, through Deputy General Manager.      

 

                                                                                                                … Opposite parties.

 

                         

BEFORE:         SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG, PRESIDENT

                        SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present: Sh. Tarun Rohila, Advocate, counsel for complainant.   

              Sh. P.K.Garg, Advocate, counsel for OPs. 

 

ORDER

 

1.                     Complainant Smt. Krishna Devi  filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 praying therein that respondents (hereinafter referred as OPs) be directed to release the amount of FDR bearing No. QBU 378434 dated 24.3.1987 which was due on 24.9.1993 of Rs. 10,000/- alongwith interest upto date alongwith compensation of Rs. 50,000/- on account of mental agony, physical harassment and Rs. 11,000/- on account of cost of proceedings. 

2.                     Brief facts of the present case are that the complainant and his brother Mohan Kumar got a FDR bearing No. QBU 378434 dated 24.3.1987 of Rs. 10,000/- which was to be matured on 24.9.1993 having maturity value of Rs. 20250/- at the rate of 11% per annum (Annexure C-1). The said FDR was issued on the basis of “EITHER OR SURVIVOR” meaning thereby, the person in whose name the FDR is issued can get its maturity value or in case of any of them dies the other survival person is entitled to get the maturity amount. It has been further mentioned that brother of the complainant Mohan Kumar was having his bank locker in the bank of OP No.1. Sh. Mohan Kumar expired on 13.7.2001 and after his death, his locker was opened by his legal heirs and in the documents and articles lying in the locker of Sh. Mohan Kumar, said FDR was also found. It has been further mentioned that complainant being the only survivor approached the OPs and requested them for releasing the maturity amount of the said FDR alongwith interest but the OPs bank did not give any proper answer to the complainant and kept on prolonging the matter on one or other pretext  and passed years. In this regard the complainant also sent a legal notice dated 25.5.2010 (Annexure C-4) through her advocate which was duly replied on 31.5.2010 whereby they admit the claim of the complainant and showed their readiness and willingness to release the payment to the complainant but despite that the amount of said FDR has not been released to the complainant despite her various visits and requests till today and the OPs have been proloning the matter without any sufficient cause or reason and thereby have illegally withhold the amount of FDR  of the complainant. Prior to this, a letter dated 9.1.2010 (Annexure C-3) was also sent to the OPs through registered AD. As the OPs have not released the amount of FDR to the complainant and as such the OPs are liable to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant on account of mental agony, harassment and financial loss alongwith amount of FDR with interest and litigation expenses.

3.                     Upon notice OPs appeared and filed their written statement by taking some preliminary objections such as the complaint is highly time barred and the same is not tenable in the eye of law and on merit it has been submitted that as per allegations of the complainant, the alleged FDR of Mohan Kumar is dated 24.3.1987 and its maturity date has been mentioned as 24.9.1993. Further it has been mentioned that as per rules and regulations of the RBI the bank is bound to destroy the record and as such the OPs have destroyed the record, as same is pertaining 24.9.1993. The present complaint has been filed in the year September 2010 i.e. after a period of near about 17 years. Hence, the OPs have no record with them to disclose the facts about the fate of the allegations. It has been further mentioned that if the FDRs which are not taken by the person after the maturity, are being transferred to the unrealized FDR of the bank which clearly means that the alleged FDR might have been encashed by Sh. Mohan Kumar during his life time and due to this reason the amount was not mentioned in the record of the unrealized FDR. Lastly, it has been prayed that complainant has neither obtained any succession certificate from any competent court of law nor the LRs of deceased Mohan Kumar has been impleaded in this case. As such the complaint on behalf of complainant Krishna Devi is not legally tenable whereas the FDR stands in the name of complainant and his brother Mohan Kumar. It has been further mentioned that they never mentioned in the reply of legal notice that they are ready to release the payment to the complainant as alleged. So, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and the complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed.

4.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Annexure CX and documents such as Photo copy of FDR Annexure C-1, Photo copy of death certificate dated 13.7.2001 of Mohan Kumar as Annexure C-2, Photo copy of letter dated 9.1.2010 as Annexure C-3, Photo copy of Registered AD legal notice dated 25.5.2010 as Annexure C-4, Photo copy of reply to the legal notice dated 31.5.2010 as Annexure C-5 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.  .

 5.                    On the other hand, counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Dinesh Goyal, Sr. Branch Manager as Annexure RX and documents such as Photo copy of revised record maintenance policy as Annexure R-1, Photo copy of record maintenance policy as Annexure R-2, Photo copy of schedules of books and files which are maintained by Bank as Annexure R-3, Photo copy of outstanding register as Annexure R-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of OPs.  

6.                     An application for directing the complainant to produce the alleged original FDR was filed by the OP bank on 18.8.2015. Notice of the same was given to the complainant and on the reply counsel for the complainant produced the original FDR alongwith reply to put up on the record which was ordered to be placed on the file.

7.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file minutely & carefully.  Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the averments made in the complaint and prayed for its acceptance whereas the counsel for the opposite parties reiterated the averments made in the reply and prayed for its dismissal.

8.                     It is not disputed that FDR of Rs. 10,000/- bearing No. QBU 378434 dated 24.3.1987 with its date of maturity on 24.9.1993 was issued by the OP No.1 bank in favour of Smt. Krishna Devi and Sh. Mohan Kumar for the period of 6 ½ years w.e.f. 24.3.1987 to 24.9.1993. Learned counsel for the complainant argued that Mohan Kumar expired on 13.7.2001 and after his death his locker was opened by his legal heirs and in the documents and articles lying in the locker of Sh. Mohan Kumar the said FDR was also found and thereafter the complainant approached to OP No.1 and requested for releasing the maturity amount of the said FDR alongwith up to date interest but the officials of the OPs bank did not give any proper reply and kept on prolonging the matter on one or other false pretext and passed the years. Learned counsel for the complainant further argued that the OP bank failed to make the payment despite letter dated 9.1.2010 Annexure C-3 and legal notice dated 25.5.2010 Annexure C-4. Hence, there is a deficiency in service on the part of OPs Bank and the complainant is legally entitled to recover the amount of  FDR alongwith interest from the OPs.

9.                     On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs hotly argued that the complaint of the complainant is highly time barred as the FDR in question was issued on 24.3.1987 with its date of maturity on 24.9.1993 and the present complaint has been filed on 10.9.2010, after a period of near about 17 years. Further the complainant has not filed any application for condonation of delay. Learned counsel for the OPs further argued that as per the version of the complainant Mohan Kumar expired on 13.7.2001 and after his death his locker was opened by his legal heirs and in his locker documents and articles were lying wherein FDR was also found from this date also i.e. 13.7.2001 the present complaint is hopelessly time barred as per section 24 (A) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. Learned counsel for the OPs further argued that the complainant has not impleaded the LRs of deceased Mohan Kumar and on this account, the complaint of the complainant is also liable to be dismissed as no succession certificate has been obtained by the complainant in her favour from the competent court of law. Further as per guidelines, rules and regulations of the RBI, the bank is bound to keep the record up to 8 years and beyond that period the bank is bound to destroy the records. As such the OPs have destroyed the record which pertains to 24.3.1987 to 24.9.1993. However, the amount of FDR which are not taken by the persons after its maturity are being transferred to unrealized FDR record and as per record available with the OPs the alleged amount of FDR has not been transferred in their register (Annexure R-4) which clearly means that the alleged FDR might have been encashed by Mohan Kumar during his life time on the basis of duplicate FDR or otherwise. Learned counsel for the OPs further argued that a false renewal on the back of the FDR for 10 years has been shown by the complainant whereas neither the signature nor any stamp (sales) of the bank is affixed on the entry of its renewal.

10.                   After going through the above noted arguments advanced by both the parties, without commenting on merit we are of the considered opinion that the complaint of the complainant is hopelessly time barred and is liable to be dismissed as  per provisions of section 24-A of the Consumer Protection which is reproduced as under:-

                        24-A. Limitation period.

                         (1) The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.

                        (2)        Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section (1), a complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1) , if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission, as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period:

                        Provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission, the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be, records its reasons for condoning such delay.

11.                   In the present complaint the FDR in question (Annexure C-1) has been issued on 24.3.1987 with its date of maturity 24.9.1993 and further Sh. Mohan Kumar expired on 13.7.2001 which is evident from death certificate (Annexure C-2) but the present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 10.9.2010 i.e. after a gap of about 17 years. The complainant has also not filed any application for condonation of delay nor she had mentioned sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within stipulated period. Hence, the present complaint is hopelessly time barred and the same is liable to be dismissed. Further the matter involved in the present complaint required voluminous evidence which is possible only in the Civil Court in regular proceedings and matter cannot be decided consumer court in summary nature. Further, on merit we are of the considered view that the complainant and her deceased brother Mohan Kumar kept mum for such a long time and not contacted with OPs and hence it cannot be said that there was any deficiency in service on the part of OPs.

12                    After going through the above noted facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that complaint of the complainant is devoid of any merit and hopelessly time barred and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the complainant shall have liberty to seek her grievance before the Civil Court, as per law, if so advised. The Assistant is directed to return the original FDR to the counsel of complainant against proper receipt to avoid the complication later on. 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 in open court. 8.10.2015.

                                                                                                ( ASHOK KUMAR GARG)

                                                                                           PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                          (S.C.SHARMA)

                                                                                           MEMBER