Haryana

Karnal

CC/55/2023

Pawan Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Punjab & Sind Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Rohan Saluja

16 Aug 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No. 55 of 2023

                                                        Date of instt.23.01.2023

                                                        Date of Decision:16.08.2024

 

Pawan Kumar (age 54 years) son of Shri Ved Parkash Verma Prop. Of Lal Jyoti Electronics, resident of house no.265, Gali no.13, Hansi Road, Karnal, Haryana.

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Punjab and Sind Bank, SBS Sr. Secondary School, Railway Road, Karnal, 132001.
2. Punjab and Sind Bank (Zonal Office), SCO 79-81, Bank Square, Sector-17B, Chandigarh-160017.
3. Punjab and Sind Bank (Head Office), 2^nd floor, 21 Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008.

 

…..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

      Ms. Sarvjeet Kaur…….Member

 

Argued by: Shri Ravi Chauhan, counsel for the complainant.

                   Shri Jatin Jain, counsel for the OP.

 

                     (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is having current account no.07501100000325 in Punjab and Sind Bank on his firm name Lal Jyoti Electronics with the branch at SBS Sr. Secondary School, Railway Road, Karnal. The account was dormant/inoperative from last 5 years and no services of the bank were used during this period. On 07.06.2022, the complainant received funds in his account amounting to Rs.23900/- for which he was eagerly waiting, but when he visited to branch for the withdrawal of the same, the Bank employee asked for aadhar card and PAN card to activate the account as it was dormant due to no transaction from last 5 years. On 09.06.2022, the complainant visited the branch again for the submission of aadhar card and PAN card, the bank employee informed that the account will be active after 24 hours when only you can withdraw funds from the account. On 10.06.2022, the complainant received multiple SMS of deduction on his mobile phone amounting to Rs.16018/- and on making enquiry from the bank he was informed that these are bank charges charged by the bank for not using the bank account. The complainant had already made multiple written requests to bank for the refund of the bank charges but he has not received any revert from the bank. Further, the complainant has submitted his complaint on the official website of the OPs but no reply was received. The charges amounting to Rs.16018/- are illegal and not acceptable because there is no intimation from the bank in form of call, SMS or letter that Rs.16018/- charges are due on his account.  The OPs have taken undue advantage of customer difficulty or in attention and has resultant into the violation of RBI policy for not intimating the customer regarding the outstanding payable amount on his bank account. Also, when the account of the complainant was dormant, this clear shows that there is no service provided by the bank and hence ideally there should be no charges. The sudden deduction of Rs.16018/- has been affected on the mental and physical health of the complainant. The complainant has issued the required notice to the OPs which was received by the OPs but did not comply with the same. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that complainant being proprietor of the firm M/s Lal Jyoti Electronics have a current account bearing no.07501100000325 with the OP no.1 since 25.08.2011. While opening said current account, he was appraised with the terms and conditions for the said current account, as per Bank’s guideline/Rules to which he agreed and also filled an affidavit in support bank’s rules and has also signed the account opening form/necessary documents in favour of OP no.1, thus undertook the terms and conditions for maintaining said current account in operation. It is further pleaded that as per the terms and conditions of the account, complainant has to maintain Rs.5,000/- as minimum balance in his said current account and on 22.08.2017 an amount of Rs.5828.01 was lying pending in his said account and out of said account, on 31.08.2017, complainant withdrew an amount of Rs.5800/- while leaving behind an amount of Rs.28.01, which was very much below the range of minimum balance of Rs.5000/- the required minimum balance which should have to be maintained by the current account holders in their said account in order to avoid levy of charges. Since 31.08.2017, complainant has become failed to keep minimum balance in their said current account thus liable for the charges for not maintaining minimum balance in their said current account from 31.08.2017 to 06.06.2022. The charges which levied and was outstanding in the said account could not be recovered due to insufficient balance in the account of complainant. It is further pleaded that on 07.06.2022 an amount of Rs.23900/- was credited in the said current account of complainant which was refund of Income Tax Claim of the complainant. A lien of the OPs was already marked for pending bank charges and in consequent where OP no.1 has deducted the charges for not maintaining minimum balance in complainant said current account as per bank’s Rules vide Bank’s circular no.3457 and its revised circular bearing no.3481 clause (6) as complainant neither maintained minimum balance of Rs.5000/- for running their said account nor they closed their said account in order to avoid charges of the OPs bank since it was below the range of minimum balance, complainant has filed the present complaint without any rhyme and reason in order to defeat the bank’s right of recovery of charges but nothing except this. It is further pleaded that OPs have rendered their services to the complaint while keeping their dormant/inoperative Current Account with them since 25.08.2011 as complainant did not close his said account and keep hire the services of the bank but if he did not operate his said account then he is liable to pay charges of the bank for running their said account with Bank as per banks guidelines and undertaking of complainant. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of bank statement Ex.C1, copy of aadhar card of complainant Ex.C2 and closed the evidence on 20.07.2023 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Bajrang Dass Gupta, Senior Manager Ex.OP1/A, copy of circular no.3481 dated 07.02.2019 Ex.OP1, copy of statement of account Ex.OP2 and closed the evidence on 09.05.2024.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant is having current account with the OPs in his firm’s name for the last 15 years.  On 07.06.2022, the complainant received Rs.23900/- in the said account but when he visited to branch for the withdrawal of the same, the Bank employee asked for aadhar card and PAN card to activate the account as it was dormant due to no transaction from last 5 years. On 09.06.2022, the complainant submitted the aadhar card and PAN card with the bank. On 10.06.2022, the complainant received SMS for deduction of Rs.16018/- and on enquiry, bank informed that these are bank charges for not using the bank account since long.  The charging of Rs.16018/- are illegal and not acceptable and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that complainant being proprietor of the firm M/s Lal Jyoti Electronics has a current account with the OP no.1 since 25.08.2011. As per the terms and conditions of the account, complainant has to maintain Rs.5,000/- as minimum balance and on 22.08.2017 an amount of Rs.5828.01 was lying pending in his said account. On 31.08.2017, complainant withdrew an amount of Rs.5800/- and left an amount of Rs.28.01 only, which was very much below the range of minimum balance of Rs.5000/-. Since 31.08.2017 to 06.06.2022, complainant has become failed to keep minimum balance in the said account and thus liable for the charges for not maintaining minimum balance.  OP no.1 has rightly deducted the amount of Rs.16018/- for not maintaining minimum balance as per bank’s Rules and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, complainant is having a current account with the OPs bank since the year 2011. It is also admitted that the account was inoperative from the last 5 years. It is also admitted that an amount of Rs.16018/- was deducted by the OPs.

11.           OPs have alleged that as per bank’s Rules, the complainant neither maintained minimum balance of Rs.5000/- for running their current account nor they closed their said account in order to avoid charges of the OPs bank. The onus to prove its version was relied upon the OPs. To prove its version, OPs relied  upon Bank’s circular no.3481 Ex.OP1 dated 07.02.2019. The clause 5 regarding Minimum Balance in current Accounts is reproduced as under:-

Minimum Balance in Current Accounts:-

Rural	Balance	S-Urban	Balance	Urban	Balance	Metro	Balance
Personal account	Rs.500/-	Personal A/c	Rs.1000/-	Personal A/c	Rs.1000/-	Personal A/c	Rs.1000/-
Other a/c	Rs.500/-	Other A/c	Rs.1000/-	Other A/c	Rs.5000/-	Other A/c	Rs.5000/-

 

12.           On perusal of the said circular, it reveals that it is mandatory that complainant’s firm had to maintain Rs.5,000/- as minimum balance but complainant has failed to maintain the same. Complainant had not maintained the minimum balance since 31.08.2017 to 06.06.2022 and that has not been denied by the complainant. Hence, in view of the abovesaid circular, OPs have rightly deducted the amount of Rs.16018/- for not maintaining minimum balance.

13.           Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:16.08.2024                                                             

                                                              President,

                                                     District Consumer Disputes

                                                     Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

 (Sarvjeet Kaur)

                              Member