BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.

Consumer Complaint No  370 of 2015

Date of Institution: 8.6.2015

Date of Decision: 9.12.2015

Smt. Padma Mahajan age 62 years widow of Sh. Avinash Chander Mahajan resident of  51, The Mall, Amritsar

Complainant

Versus

1. The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Town Hall, Amritsar
2. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Town Hall, Amritsar

Opposite Parties

Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present:    For the Complainant                  :  Sh.Arvinder Mahajan,Advocate

               For the Opposite Party      : Sh. Talwinder Singh,Advocate

Quorum:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President

Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member

Sh. Anoop Sharma, Member

Order dictated by:

Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President.

1. Present complaint has been filed by Sh. Padma Mahajan under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein she is operating saving bank account No. 10978345836 and was also operating locker in the branch of the opposite party for the last many years. According to the complainant she has closed her locker in 2009 and delivered the keys of the locker to the concerned authority of the opposite party and has cleared all the dues of the locker  to the bank through her aforesaid saving bank account. Complainant has alleged that even after the closure of the locker, the opposite party deducted Rs. 2500/- per year . Complainant approached the opposite party and requested them not to deduct the amount of locker rent and refund all the amounts deducted, but to no avail. The complainant also served legal notice dated 23.11.2013  demanding the refund of illegal deduction of amounts . Then the opposite party refunded Rs. 7500/- on 2.12.2013. Complainant has further alleged that opposite party again  charged locker rent of Rs. 2500/- on 2.4.2014 and Rs. 2500/- on 2.5.2015. Again complainant approached the officials of the opposite party and requested for the refund of  the amount illegally deducted by the opposite party, but they did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant rather threatened the complainant that they will keep on charging the locker rent  from the saving bank account of the complainant as the complainant has served legal notice upon the officials of the opposite party. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to refund the locker rent amount of four years illegally deducted from the saving bank account No. 10978345836.  Opposite parties be further directed not to charge/deduct the locker rent in future. Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, opposite parties No.1 & 2 appeared  and filed written version in which it was submitted that the amount deducted inadvertently due to software problem had been credited in the account of the complainant and  no amount of any sort is due. It was submitted that Rs. 7500/- was credited to the account of the complainant on 2.12.2013 and  Rs. 5000/- was credited to the account of the complainant on 5.8.2015. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-4.
4. Opposite parties tendered affidavit of Sh. Vipan Gupta, Deputy Manager Ex.OP1,2/1, account statement Ex.OP1,2/2.
5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the  parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it stands fully proved on record that complainant has saving bank account No. 10978345836 and she was also operating locker in branch of opposite party for the last so many years.  This fact has been admitted by the opposite party that the complainant has long back in the year 2006, closed her locker and delivered the keys of the locker to the opposite party and cleared all the dues of the locker to the bank through her aforesaid saving bank account. From the record it stands also proved that after the closure of the locker by the complainant, the key of which was duly accepted by the opposite party, opposite party bank charged rent of locker @ Rs. 2500/- per year for three years i.e. for the year 8/2007 and debited this amount of Rs. 2500/- on 13.8.2007 to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant. Again rent of the locker was charged @ Rs. 2500/- and debited to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant on 10.10.2008 . Again on 2.4.2011 opposite party debited Rs. 2500/- as locker rent to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant. Then the complainant served legal notice dated 23.11.2013 Ex.C-3 to the opposite party . Opposite party admitting this fact that due to software problem, they have wrongly debited this amount as locker rent from the complainant. Resultantly they refunded Rs. 7500/- and credited the same to the account of the complainant on 2.12.2013 as is evident from the statement of account produced by the opposite party Ex.OP1,2/2. But even thereafter the opposite party again charged locker rent Rs. 2500/- and debited the same to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant on 2.4.2014 and again Rs. 2500/- as locker rent were debited to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant on 2.4.2015 as is evident from the statement of account produced by the opposite party itself Ex.OP1,2/2. The complainant again lodged protest with the opposite party. Then the opposite party refunded this amount Rs. 5000/- and credited the same to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant on 5.8.2015 as is evident from the statement of account Ex.OP1,2/2 produced by the opposite party itself . All this proves that  despite repeated requests made by the complainant to the opposite party and also despite service of legal notice, the opposite party fully knowing  that the complainant had already closed her locker facilities in the opposite party bank branch  in 2006 and delivered the keys of the locker  to the concerned authorities of the opposite party and has also cleared all the dues of the locker  to the bank and even after serving of legal notice  Ex.C-3 by the complainant upon the opposite party, opposite party is going on committing the same mistake by deducting locker rent and debiting the same to the aforesaid saving bank account of the complainant and  the complainant had to approach the opposite party and made requests for the refund of the amount repeatedly. So all this proves deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

7.       Resultantly we partly allow this complaint and the opposite party is directed to pay compensation  Rs. 5000/- to the complainant. Opposite party is also directed to pay litigation expenses Rs. 2000/- to the complainant. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

9.12.2015                                                             ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

/R/                        ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)           (Anoop Sharma)

Member                                   Member