Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/52/2018

Dalwara Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab Sind Bank - Opp.Party(s)

M.S Nagra

30 Jan 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

Consumer Complaint No.       :         52 of 2018

Date of Institution                             :         08.10.2018

Date of Decision                     :         30.01.2019

Dalwara Singh son of Sh.Sucha Singh R/o VPO Mehandpur, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar.                                                                                                                                       ….Complainant

Versus

1.       Punjab and Sind Bank, HO at 21 Rajindera Palace, New Delhi – 110088, through its Managing Director.

2.       Punjab and Sind Bank, Zonal Office, Hoshiarpur.

3.       Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch Majari, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar through its Manager.

          …Opposite Parties

                             Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

S.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY:

For complainant            :         Sh.M.S. Nagra, Advocate

For OPs                         :         Sh.A.S. Syan, Advocate

 

ORDER

1.   Complainant filed present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by alleging that complainant is holding a joint account both operative in OP-3 with No.04601000010094 in joint name of Dalwara Singh and Smt.Mohinder Kaur paternal aunt (real) of complainant with a closing balance as on 23.05.2018 was Rs.9,03,943.96 Paisa and after that the account has not been operated since Smt.Mohinder Kaur wife of Late Swarn Singh R/o VPO Mehandpur who expired on 11.03.2018.  Said Mohinder Kaur does not own any landed property anywhere in India and the other account holder in the joint account is the sole owner of the bank balance of said joint account.  After death of one partner in the joint account late Mohinder Kaur, the other joint holder Dalwara Singh above said applied for withdrawal of last balance amount of said joint account to OP-3 alongwith claim form, an affidavit by Dalwara Singh duly sworn and attested by Executive Magistrate, indemnity bond complete in all respects alongwith copy of Adhar Card and all other required documents duly attested have been submitted in OP bank in the month of August 2018. But Branch Manager of OP-3 denied to make the payment to complainant on some false and frivolous grounds in spite of completing all the legal formalities alongwith desired claim form duly attested.  The legal position of present account is that both Mohinder Kaur and Dalwara Singh were equal share holders in the said account and were owner of the whole amount jointly and after the death of Mohinder Kaur, Dalwara Singh complainant is undisputedly sole owner of the whole bank balance alongwith interest upto date.  As per provision of joint accounts, one partner after the death of the other , if account is intestate (without any will) is the sole owner and right holder of any such account.  The complainant has been compelled by delay tactics of the Manager of OP-3 and this act of Ops amount to unfair trade practice under CP Act, 1986.  Lastly, it is prayed that OPs be directed to make payment of existing balance of the said account alongwith interest and Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for unnecessary and illegal harassment and Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, OPs had failed to appear and ultimately, the OPs were proceeded  against ex parte vide order dated 27.11.2018.  Thereafter, case was fixed for arguments and on application of OPs, the OPs were allowed to join the proceedings at that stage only to advance arguments.
3. To prove the case, counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, alongwith photocopies of documents i.e. passbook Ex.C-1, copy of death certificate Ex.C-2 and in re-joinder he also tendered copy of adhaar card of complainant Ex.C-3, affidavit – cum – indemnity letter Ex.C-4, affidavit duly attested by Magistrate Class-1 as Ex.C-5 and closed the evidence.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for parties and have also gone through the record carefully.
5. During arguments the contentions of counsel for complainant are similar to its respective pleadings, so no need to reiterate the same. Thus, virtually statement of complainant suffered through affidavit which is Ex.CW1/A is fully believable that he having closing balance with OPs bank and all the formalities of OPs have been completed by complainant.  Moreover, OPs have failed to produced any cogent evidence for delay in making payment to complainant.  Further, counsel for OPs has admitted that amount in the account in question is lying with OPs bank and belongs to account holders.  He also submitted that amount can be released if the complainant completed formalities of OP bank.  
6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances, the present complaint is disposed of with directions to complainant to complete all formalities of the OP bank within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter, the OPs are directed to settle the dispute of complainant regarding releasing amount lying in account in question alongwith interest within a period of 15 days.            
7. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.
8. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Dated:  30.01.2019

 

  

(Kanwaljeet Singh)       (Kuljit Singh)

Member                         President