Order-11.
Date-08/09/2016.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
The case of the complainant, in short, is that Late Gobinda Lal Dutta, predecessor in interest of the complainant, had a term deposit for Rs.10,000/- being receipt no.G182004 dated 08-03-1976 and its date of maturity was 08-05-1981 (Savings A/c. No.520) at the OP Bank at Jorasanko Branch, Girish Park, Kolkata – 700 006. OP Bank in response to legal notice of the complainant dated 14-11-2002 informed the lawyer of the complainant that interest would be paid on the said term deposit at the agreed rate till its maturity on 08-05-1981 and not, thereafter, OP Bank did not furnish any statement of account in this regard. Gobinda Lal died before the maturity of the fixed deposit. The father of the complainant namely Madan Mohan Dutta, since deceased, was the executer of the Will of his elder brother Late Gobinda Lal Dutta and the complainant is one of the beneficiaries. The said term deposit matured during the pendency of the probate proceeding and it could not be withdrawn by the father of the complainant for pending of the probate proceeding. Late Madan Mohan Dutta, the father of the complainant wrote a letter to the OP Bank to renew or continue the said term deposit for a further period of 63 months or till the end of the probate case. But OP Bank sat tight and, thereafter, the said probate proceeding got its finality on 21-01-2000 and the beneficiary got the probate on 21-01-2002. It is alleged that the Bank did not renew the term deposit for the proposed period and also pay the interest of the term deposit at the agreed rate till its withdrawal. It is alleged that the complainant has suffered a lot for the arbitrary action on the part of the OP Bank. Hence, this case.
OP Bank has contested the case in filing written version contending, inter alia, that the case is barred by limitation and is defective due to non-joinder and mis-joinder of the parties. It is stated that the complainant is neither a consumer nor a beneficiary as per definition of C.P. Act. It is stated that a customer will get the fixed deposit amount when the same becomes matured. It is stated that the Bank has already paid the entire amount after calculating the dues of the customer. The statements in Para 2 to 15 are denied and are stated to be false and baseless. It is also alleged that the statements made in Para 16 to 20 are totally false and baseless.
Point for Decision
- Whether OP has exhibited a demeanour of unfair trade practice?
- Whether OP Bank is deficient in service?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons
We have seen the materials in record namely Photostat copy of term deposit receipt no.G182004, Date of issue – 08-03-1976, letter of Madan Mohan Dutta dated 09-03-1984 to OP Bank, reply of the said Bank dated 27-03-1994, legal notices etc. and other materials on record.
It appears from the materials on record that Madan Mohan Dutta, since deceased was executor of a Will which was executed by his elder brother Late Gobinda Lal Dutta. Late Gobinda Lal Dutta as we find was the holder of the subject term deposit of Rs.10,000/- dated 08-03-1976, its maturity date being 08-05-1981. Gobinda Lal Dutta died and the term deposit was matured on 08-05-1981. It appears that complainant and other beneficiaries were paid the said maturity amount of the term deposit being no.3182004. It appears that Gobinda Lal Dutta died on 24-06-1976 and after that the said Will was put into probate proceeding. The fact remains Late Gobinda Lal Dutta did not withdraw the matured amount, so the Bank Authority had found no person to disburse the matured amount, as the probate was not obtained by the legal heirs of Late Gobinda Lal Dutta till then. We find that the term deposit could not renewed in absence of any specific prayer to that effect by the rightful owner or legal heir of the said movable property of Late Gobina Lal Dutta. So, the bank paid interest upto the date of its maturity in respect of the subject term deposit till 08-05-1981 and the matured amount Rs.16,728-40 was paid unto the complainants and the others. It is also given to understand to say from the documents on record that the savings bank interest was paid on the said amount of Rs.16,728-40 onward 09-05-1981 as per the directive of the higher authorities of the bank upon the OP Bank. As a follow up of general rule there was no auto renewal of the subject SDR in absence of any original owner of the same, and accordingly, the SB interest was given subsequent to 09-05-1981 in respect of the said fixed deposit. Point is OP bank has not furnished any statement of account in this respect to the complainant. We think that it was the duty of the OP Bank to furnish statement of accounts to the complainant. In spite of legal notice and repeated requests bank failed and neglected to furnish the statement of accounts. We find that it was a deficiency of service.
In result, the case succeeds.
Hence,
Ordered
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the OPs.
OPs are directed to render statement of accounts to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.
OPs are also directed jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- for causing harassment and mental agony to the complainant apart from litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- within the said stipulated period.
Failure to comply with the order will entitle the complainant to put the order into execution u/s.25 read with Section 27 of the C.P. Act and in that event OPs shall be liable to pay penal damage at the rate ofRs.500/- per month to be paid to this Forum till full and final satisfaction of the decree.
