DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No.221/2011
SENIOR CITIZEN
L R Mahajan
C-1-117, Lajpat Nagar,
New Delhi-110024 ….Complainant
Versus
1. Punjab National Bank
Head Office 7, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110068
2. Punjab National Bank
Plot No. A, Safdarjung Development Area,
(Near Kamal Cinema),
New Delhi-110029 ……Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 21.06.11 Date of Order : 26.07.16
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
O R D E R
Briefly stated, the case of the Complainant is that the Complainant was maintaining account No.061200DP00000157 & 061200DP00000652 with the OP No.2. Complainant procured Fixed Deposit (F.D.) on 02.12.96 and 30.06.96 from OP No.2 and made the renewal of FD of Rs.23031/- from 28.02.98 @ 12.5% with maturity value of Rs.42618/- and renewal for Rs.22145/- form 29.11.96 to 29.11.02 @ 14% with maturity value of Rs.40756/- respectively. He had collected the FD through AR on 18.04.11. He was shocked to see that the OP No.2 had given very low amount of interest of the maturity value. The OP No.2 had renewed FD of Rs.45869/- w.e.f. 18.04.11 to 18.04.12 with maturity value of Rs.50531/- only which should come out to Rs.81318/- hence, he had suffered a loss of Rs.31,000/- on this FD. He had renewed another FD No.104933733 through his AR on 16.05.11 and shocked to learn that the OP No.2 had again paid lower interest on the FD. The FD was renewed of Rs.45726/- w.e.f. 16.05.11 to 16.05.12 with maturity value of Rs.50473/- only which should come out to be Rs.82618/-. Thus, he suffered a loss of Rs.32,000/- (approx.) on these FDs. He made a complaint to the Circle Officer of OPs vide his letter dated 26.04.11 against the inadequate interest levied on his F.Ds but he did not receive any reply from the OPs. He had never recovered or withdrawn his F.D. investment since 1996 but OP-2 levied low interest on the amount of its value on 18.04.2011 & 16.05.2011 respectively. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of OPs the complaint has been filed with the following prayers:-
- Direct the OPs to pay a total sum of Rs.98,000/- to the Complainant which has been calculated as follows:-
- Rs.31,000 + Rs.32,000 = Rs.63000/- (actual interest to be levied on FD investment due on 18.04.12 & 16.05.12.)
- Rs.25,000/- for mental agony and harassment caused to the Complainant who is a senior citizen.
- Rs.10,000/- towards litigation & miscellaneous charges.
OP-2 in the written statement has stated that there was an FDR of the Complainant which was due for payment on 28.02.03 and was overdue since then. The Complainant came to OP No.2 for renewal on 18.04.11 and the interest on the said FDR after 22.08.03 was paid at saving fund rate in terms of their Head Office circular No.24/2011 dated 07.04.2011 whereby on any term deposit which is overdue before 21.01.08 no interest will be paid till 21.08.08 and thereafter w.e.f. 22.08.08 saving rate of interest will be payable till the date of renewal of the FDR. The Complainant himself has been the employee of OPs and he has filed a false complaint before this Forum. The Complainant himself admitted that even after the expiry of the FDR on 28.02.03 the renewal thereafter was not done which is very strange fact and seeking interest which is far beyond the circular and calculation thereon. Both FDRs were not renewed on the date of maturity i.e. on 28.02.03 and 29.11.02. They were renewed on 18.04.11 and 16.05.11 respectively. Therefore, the question of any interest for intervening period from or till the date when the FDRs were not renewed does not arise as per the OP Circular No.24/2011. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed rejoinder to the written statement of OP-2s.
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence while affidavit of Sh. Manohar Lal, Attorney Holder has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties. We have heard the arguments on behalf of the Complainant and have also gone through the file very carefully.
The only question which arises for our consideration is, whether the complainant was/is entitled to the interest at the FDR interest rate for the period for which he had not got his 2 FDRs renewed? It is an admitted fact that the complainant did not get the FDRs renewed after their maturity on 28.2.2003 and 22.8.2003 respectively. He got his FDRs renewed in the year 2011 as stated hereinabove. The OPs have relied on circular No. 24/2011 dated 7.4.2011 stated to have been issued by their head office whereby on any term deposit which was overdue before 21.8.2008 no interest was payable and on the FDRs which became overdue w.e.f. 22.8.2008 simple interest was payable on them. Firstly, the OPs have not filed any authority or delegation of powers under which the Head office of the OPs had issued any such circular to give it retrospective effect. No penal provision can be enacted or promulgated or enforced by giving it retrospective effect. Penal provisions have to be given prospective effect. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the OPs were not at all entitled to pay no interest to the complainant w.e.f. 28.2.2003 and 22.8.2003 till 21.8.2008 on the basis of said circular.
The complainant who had been an employee of the OPs must have been aware about the rules with regard to the FDRs. In those days, FDRs used not to be renewed automatically and the customer had to apply for renewal of the FDRs and in case of his failure to do so, the maturity amount had to be transferred to the saving account. Therefore, the OPs ought to have calculated the saving rate interest on the amount of maturity of the FDRs after 28.2.2003 and 22.8.2003 till 18.4.2011 and 16.5.2011 respectively on which the FDRs had been got renewed on behalf of the complainant.
Therefore, the OPs shall now calculate the saving rate interest on the 2 FDRs w.e.f. 28.2.2003 and 22.8.2003 respectively till 18.4.2011 and 16.5.2011 respectively and shall issue fresh FDRs on the amount so calculated in the complaint within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 26.7.2016
(Naina Bakshi) (N. K. Goel)
Member President
Case No. 221/11
26.7.2016
Present – None.
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, the complaint is allowed. The OP shall now calculate the saving rate interest on the 2 FDRs w.e.f. 28.2.2003 and 22.8.2003 respectively till 18.4.2011 and 16.5.2011 respectively and shall issue fresh FDRs on the amount so calculated in the complaint within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly. Let the file be consigned to record room.
(Naina Bakshi) (N. K. Goel)
Member President
