IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday the 31st day of January, 2017
Filed on 20.07.2015
Present
1.Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2.Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.224/2015
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party-
Sri. Arun Chandrasekhar South Indian Bank
Ramapuram House K.K. Building, Nandanam
Ezhupunna North Aroor Post, Cherthala
Ezhupunna P.O. Represented by its Manager
Cherthala Taluk Pin – 688 3534
Alappuzha – 688 548 (By Adv. P.K. Mathew)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant approached the Manager of the opposite party to open a current account in the opposite party bank. The then Manager of the opposite party has agreed with the same and thus he has supplied to the complainant the necessary applications/forms, which were printed sheets with doted spaces, to be filled up by the complainant in order to open a new current account. The complainant has duly filled up by the complainant in order to open a new current account. The complainant has duly filled up the same to the satisfaction of the opposite party and submitted the same before him. After receiving the application forms etc. from the complainant found the same as satisfactory to open a current account in the name of the complainant and thus, a current account No. 0606073000000173 was duly opened on 5.3.2015, in the opposite party bank, at its branch office, Aroor with an initial deposit of Rs.5,000/- deposited by the complainant, in the name and residential address of this complainant. Moreover, the then Manager of the opposite party at that time, had also agreed, promised and also firmly caused to believe this complainant that the same current account is quite valid and perfect in all respect and that what all formalities which this complainant as an account holder ought to have been done or complied with, has already been fully complied with by the complainant. Opposite party also issued a passbook in the said current account to the complainant on 5.3.2015 itself, also duly crediting an initial payment of Rs.5,000/- in it, which amounts were remitted by the complainant in cash. Thus the opposite party has credited the same amount in the said current account and issued a passbook to the complainant. Acting upon the above promises, assurances and undertakings of the opposite party, the complainant has changed his mind to his detriment also investing large amounts/money in the said account, for earning his lively hood by means of self employment and thus accordingly the complainant has also given his respective current account number to his various friends and proposed future customers etc., who have had also agreed to undertake financial dealing or transaction with the complainant in the proposed activities of self employment for his lively hood and also investing money and various efforts etc. hence thereafter, the opposite party is also stopped from withdrawing or denying the same, by the principles of promissory estoppels. Thus pm 5th , 6th , 7th , and 9th of March of 2015, few of his friends and relatives have made money deposits in the said account to the tune of Rs.64,000/- as grant total. Thus, on 12th of March 2015, when the cheque facility and such other facility in the said current account was still delaying by the opposite party, the complainant was constrained to be personally present in the bank of the opposite party with his passbook, for withdrawing Rs.50,000/- by means of withdrawal slip, leaving a then balance of Rs.14,000/- in the said account. Though the passbook was then with the complainant, credit and debit entries as on 12.3.2015 were deliberately omitted by the opposite party to enter in the said passbook for the reason best known to the opposite party. Thereafter, it is understood that a further deposit of Rs.9,000/- was also remitted by one of the friend of the complainant on 12.3.2015, in the said account. To the best information of the complainant there is still an outstanding balance of Rs.23,000/- only as on 12.3.2015 in the said account of the complainant. The complainant could not transact the account or withdraw any amount from 13.3.2015 onwards to till date also copying minimum deposit of Rs.5,000/- in the said account. From 13.3.2015 onwards the opposite party withholding entire deposit without allowing the complainant to withdraw any further amount from the said account for the reasons not known in the complaint. The opposite party has also so far paid to grant any cheque facility to the complainant in the above current account. Thus all the future expectation of the complainant to earn his lively hood by means of self employment was also put in danger also necessitating unnecessary and further additional expenses, sufferings etc. by the complainant. The above said action by the opposite party also colluding with the Manager of M/s. Lawson Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. at Ernakulam in order to wreak his vengeance against the complainant for filing the petition against them before the District Labour Officer, Ernakulam. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complaint is filed.
2. The version of the opposite party is as follows:-
It is true that on an application of the complainant for opening a current account, application is entertained by the bank. As documentary proof he has produced his driving license, declaration and pan card. As current account is generally opened for business purposes, as per the directions of RBI and as per the KYC compliances for opening a current account the bank required to collect the details of the employment/occupation specifically from the account holders. The complainant has stated in his opening form that his occupation is self employment, the bank insisted for submitting a proof regarding the details of employment for allowing operation in the account. Therefore a letter was sent to him on 12.3.2015 requesting to furnishing the details. Instead the complainant has sent a lawyer notice dated 23.3.2015 through his Advocate. The bank has sent a reply on 13.4.2015 stating that the bank is prepared to co-operate with the customer provided he produced the required information. But the complainant was not ready to co-operate with the bank and then filed the above complaint. The information sought by the bank only for protecting the customer and also for getting clarity about the transactions in the account as per RBI directions. The complainant never produced his passbook for updating. The bank has issued a letter to the party on 12.3.2015 and also in reply to the lawyer notice on 13.4.2015 for submitting the details called forth in order to allow transaction in the account. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.
4. The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 to A13. The opposite party examined as RW1. Documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B10. One witness was examined as RW2.
4. The points that arose for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the side of the opposite party?
3) If so the reliefs and costs?
5. Point No.1:- According to the complainant he had opened the current account with the opposite party for the service to be availed by him exclusively for the purpose of earning his lively hood by means of self employment. Ext.A1 is the customer relationship current account opening form. It clearly shows that the occupation of the complainant is self employment and the complaint is filed alleging deficiency in service by the opposite party, from whom the complainant is hiring service. Hence the complaint is found maintainable.
6. Points 2 & 3:- It is an admitted fact that on an application of the complainant a current account was opened on 5.3.2015 by the opposite party. According to the complainant on 5.3.2015 an initial deposit of Rs.5,000/- was deposited by him and opposite party has issued a passbook in the said account to the complainant duly credited an initial payment of Rs.5,000/- in it. Ext.A2 evidenced the same. Ext.B5 the account copy produced by the opposite party shows that the outstanding total balance as on 12.3.2015 in the said account is Rs.23,000/-. The allegation of the complainant is that he could not transact account or withdraw any amount from 13.3.2015 onwards, since the opposite party with-hold in the entire deposit. The contention of the opposite party is that as current account is generally opened for business purpose and as per the directions of the RBI and as per the KYC (Knower your customer) compliances for opening the current account, the bank is required to collect the details of the employment / occupation specifically from the account holders. They further stated that they have sent a letter to the complainant on 12.3.2015 requesting him to furnish the details of the employment, since the complainant failed to produce it at the time of opening his account. So the question to be answered is whether the account can be frozen for the non furnishing of information by the complainant. It is an admitted fact that opposite party allowed the complainant to open a current account and complainant made transaction till 12.3.2015. Had the opposite party has knowledge about the directions of RBI and KYC norms as stated in the version, why they allowed the complainant to open a current account without receiving details of employment from the complainant is not clear. According to the opposite party, they have sent a letter to the complainant on 12.3.2015 requesting him to furnish details of his employment at the earliest. But complainant stated that he has received the said letter dated 12.3.2015 only on 21.3.2015 and from the postal seal affixed in the postal cover it is clear that the same letter was sent by the opposite party by registered post only on 19.3.2015. In order to substantiate the said allegation, he has produced the letter dated 12.3.2015 sent by the opposite party and the postal cover of the said letter, it marked as Ext.A5 series (a) and (b). On perusing the said documents, it is clear from the postal seal affixed in the postal cover that the said letter was sent only on 19.3.2015. Apart from that the operation of the account was frozen prior to the receipt of Ext.A5(a) notice issued by the bank. In the notice there is no mention regarding the freezing of the account, on failure to furnishing details. Hence the conduct of opposite party in with-holding the account without proper notice amounts to deficiency in service.
7. The complainant alleged in the complaint that the opposite party in collusion with the Manager of M/s. LAWSON Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. at Ernakulam committing breach of contract by illegally with-hold the deposit amount belonging to the complainant. Opposite party totally denied this allegation made by the complainant. There is no documents produced by the complainant to prove that opposite party made collusion with M/s. LAWSON Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. at Ernakulam, in order to with-hold the deposit of the complainant. No Police case was charged against the opposite party by the complainant alleging the said collusion. In the absence of any reliable evidence, we cannot say that there is collusion with the Manager of the company and the opposite party regarding the with-holding of deposit amount belongs to the complainant. Moreover it is not a matter which this Forum expected to probe into. As we have discussed above, for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant is to be compensated.
In the result, complaint is partly allowed. The opposite party is directed to restore the current account No. 0606073000000173 of the complainant after receiving the details of his employment. The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand only) towards compensation to the complainant for the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. The order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the day 31st day of January, 2017.
Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine. D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Arun Chandrasekhar (Witness)
Ext.A1 - True copy of the printed application / declaration forms etc.
Ext.A2 - True copy of the passbook of the complainant
Ext.A3 - True copy of the relevant pages 29,30,31,32,33 and 34 of the computer
Print out of the statement of account from the SB account of the complainant
Ext.A4 - True copy of the summons issued to the complainant before the Hon’ble
Labour Court, Ernamulam
Ext.A5 series - True photo copy of the letter dated 12.3.2015 with postal cover
- & (b)
Ext.A6 - True office copy of the lawyer notice dated 23.3.2015
Ext.A7 - True photo copy of the postal acknowledgement card
Ext.A8 - True copy of the pre-dated 13.4.15) reply notice of the opposite party
Ext.A9 - True copy of the postal cover
Ext.A10 - Internet copy from the web-site of the South Indian Bank
Ext.A11 - Statement of account dated 13.11.2015
Ext.A12 - Original letter dated 12.3.2015
Ext.A13 - Original reply notice dated 12.3.15 & its postal cover
Evidence of the opposite party:-
RW1 - Vivek Viswan (Witness)
RW2 - Sijo Paul. B. (Witness)
Ext.B1 - Letter dated 12.3.2015
Ext.B2 - Photo copy of the customer relationship & current account opening form
Ext.B3 - Letter dated 5.3.15
Ext.B4 - Copy of the form for other related information – KYC
Ext.B5 - Statement of account from South Indian Bank
Ext.B6 - Copy of the letter dated 13.4.15
Ext.B7 - Postal cover with acknowledgement card
Ext.B8 - Copy of the letter dated 1.7.14 with Rules of RBI
Ext.B9 - Scanned copy of the customer relationship & current account opening form
Ext.B10 - Letter & Rules of RBI
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
