DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION JALANDHAR

Complaint No.246 of 2020 Date of Instt.24.08.2020 Date of Decision: 20.04.2021

Mehak aged about 18 ½ years D/o Late Sh. Ashwani Kumar R/o H. No.43, Mohalla Nilamahal, at present H. No. 175/22, Shiv Nagar, Sodal Road, Near PNB, Jalandhar City.

….Complainant

Versus

1. The Punjab National Bank, Corporate Office, Plot No.4, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi, through its Chairman/Managing Director.

2. The Punjab National Bank, Old Railway Road, Jalandhar, through its Manager.

…Opposite Parties

QUORUM:

SH. KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

MS. JYOTSNA, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For Complainant : Sh.R.K. Bhalla, Advocate

For OP No.1 : Exparte

For OP No.2 : Sh.Sorav Gupta, Advocate

ORDER

KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

1. The learned counsel for complainant has alleged that complainant is running saving bank account No.3513000112717397 with OP-2. At the time of opening of account, the complainant was minor. The mother of complainant expired on 30.03.2003 and thereafter, on 27.09.2007, the father of complainant, who was working as sewer man in Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar, expired. After the death of father and mother, complainant is only legal heir and she was minor at the time of death of her parents. After death of father of complainant, a family pension is sanctioned to complainant and that family pension was and still credited in the bank account of complainant. Complainant being minor was not competent to operate the bank account and to withdraw the family pension and therefore, the real uncle of complainant namely Kamal filed a petition for appointment of guardian under Section 25 and 26 of the Guardian and Wards Act and the said petition was allowed by court of Guardian Judge vide order dated 09.03.2010. In view of the order passed by the court, the said petitioner namely Kamal started operating said bank account of complainant. The date of birth of complainant is 16.03.2002. Hence on 16.03.2020, complainant became major and is fully competent to operate the bank account running with OP-2. On 19.03.2020, the complainant moved an application that she became major and therefore, she be allowed to operate said account. OP-2 replied vide letter dated 20.03.2020 to complainant as per Majority Act, 1875, in case of minor of whose person or property of both, the Guardian has been appointed by court of justice, the age of majority will be 21 years. In fact, as per Majority Act, 1875, Section 3(1), it has been specifically mentioned that “every person domicile in India, shall attain the age of majority on his competing the age of 18 years or not before”. Hence, as per the act, the age of majority of any person who is domicile in India, is 18 years. But despite that OP-2 did not permit the complainant to operate the bank account. The complainant issued legal notice dated 12.07.2020 to OP-2 by which OP-2 was called upon to permit the complainant operate the account with the period of seven days but complainant was not allowed to do so. The OP-2 even did not bother to give reply to complainant of her counsel to said legal notice. Lastly, prayer has been made that OPs be directed to immediate allow the complainant to operative her bank account and further be directed to pay Rs.4 Lacs as compensation for harassment and also claimed litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, OPs No.1 failed to appear and ultimately were proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 19.01.2021.

3. The OP No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written reply. Preliminary objections taken that complaint is not maintainable. On merits, most of averments made in complaint are admitted. Other averments made in the complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties produced on the file their respective evidence.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by the counsel for the complainant, very carefully.

6. It is admitted fact that the complainant was minor at the time of opening of account. But complainant has produced record qua its age, from which it is crystal clear that complainant is now attaining age of 18 years.

7. Moreover, as per Majority Act, 1875, Section 3(1), it has been specifically mentioned that “every person domicile in India, shall attain the age of majority on his competing the age of 18 years or not before”.

8. The Hon'ble Punjab High Court in case titled Ram Chand Versus Sardara Singh and another reported in 1962 AIR (Punjab)-382 held as under.-

“Succession Act, 1925, Sections 57 and 213- Probate of a will  executed in the Punjab- Section 213 (1) requiring probate do  not apply to wills made outside Bengal and the local original  jurisdictional limit of the High Courts at Madras and Bombay  except where such wills relate to immovable property situate  within those territories. No probate, therefore, is necessary in  order to set up a claim regarding property either movable or  immovable on the basis of a will executed in the Punjab and not  relating to property situated in the territories mentioned in  Section 57 (a) of the said Act.”

9. This old citation of the Hon'ble Punjab High Court is even today fully applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present complaint.

10. In view of our above discussion, present complaint is partly allowed and OPs are directed to allow the complainant who is major to fully operate the bank account etc in question immediately. Further the complainant has been harassed by not allow her to operate said account, as such, complainant entitled for compensation of Rs.5,000/- including litigation expenses.

11. Entire compliance of above said be made by OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. This file could not decided due to rush of work and spread of Covid-19.

12. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, free of costs. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Announced in open Commission

20^th of April 2021

Kuljit Singh

(President)

Jyotsna

(Member)