This appeal is directed against the final order passed by Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Darjeeling dated 15/5/2018 in reference to CC/11/D/2017. The fact of the case in nutshell is that the respondent Norbu TShering Tamang has registered a consumer complain before the Ld. Forum, Darjeeling to the effect that he had a savings account no. 20169394538 at SBI, Kalimpong Branch where is another account bearing no. 31323079600 was in force. The complainant wanted to close the savings account no. 20169394538 and the fund of the said account to be transferred to the another account of the said bank mentioned above by application dated 01/04/2017. The Bank authority then endorse a note by which ask the complainant to furnish KYC documents and to deposit a minimum of Rs. 500 only in the said account. On 3/4/2017  the complainant submitted the KYC and tried to deposit Rs 1,000 but unfortunately, the payment was not accepted by the computerised system of the Bank. On the advice of the Bank the complainant deposited said Rs. 1,000 in the said saving account vide cheque no.010759 but the credit of the said Rs. 1,000 was not reflected in the said saving account. In spite of the repeated request verbally and in written the SBI, Kalimpong Branch neither updating the said account nor did it close the account and debit remaining balance amount to the complainant’s account no. 31323079600. Some deficiency of service on the part of the Bank was there. The complainant had to submit a consumer complaint before the Ld. Forum, Darjeeling. The State Bank of India, Kalimpong Branch had contested the consumer dispute by filing written version. The Ld. Forum has heard the matter in presence of both sides after recording evidences and passed the impugned order under appeal with a direction of the Bank to update savings account no. 20169394538 and then close the said account after transferring the remaining balance amount in the complainant’s another account lying in the same Bank. The SBI, Kalimpong Branch was further ordered by the Ld. Forum to pay compensation of Rs. 25,000 and litigation cost of Rs. 20,000. Being aggrieved with the said order this appeal follows on the ground that the order Ld. Forum contain errors and full of irregularity and liable to be set aside. The appeal was admitted before this Commission and the respondent issue notice could not contest the appeal case in spite of receiving the notice. So, the appeal was heard only in presence of the Ld. Advocate of the appellant.

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

            After hearing Ld. Advocate of the appellant it is established beyond any doubt that the respondent/complainant is customer of the Kalimpong Branch of SBI, having two savings accounts in his name and he wanted to close the first account and submitted an application to transfer the fund of the said account to the other account and for that reason he was asked  to keep minimum balance of Rs. 500 in the account which he intended to close and he was also asked to submit the KYC. The complainant/respondent has duly complied with the advice of the Bank authority and submitted the KYC and also deposited a cheque of Rs. 1,000 to credit into his account in the said account which he intended to close. At the time of hearing of the case it is reflected that in the Bank statements furnished by the appellant that the cheque amount of Rs. 1,000 has already been credited into the account of the complainant bearing no. 20169394538  but it was done subsequently and the closure of the first account bearing no. 20169394538 was not done in due time which clearly indicates that there was deficiency of service on the part of the Bank authority. On the other hand, it is also established beyond any doubt that no monitory  loss was there on the part of the complainant/respondent. His deposit of Rs. 1,000 by a cheque already entered into his account which was subsequently closed as he intended. He had to suffer mentally due to lackadaisical attitude of the Bank not entering the one thousand rupees into the credit of the Bank account of the complainant in due time. For that reason he deserves to be compensated for the deficiency of service on the part of the appellant authority. On the other hand the order of Ld. Forum regarding the quantum of compensation and litigation cost appears to be excessive one in proportion of the wrong committed by the appellant for not providing the proper service in due time. So, we do not find any gross mistake on the part of the Ld. Forum regarding the opinion of the Forum about the deficiency of service on the part of the SBI, Kalimpong. The Commission only thinks it fit to reduce the amount of compensation and litigation cost which appears to be excessive one.

            At the time of hearing the chief manager Mr. C. Gupta of SBI, Kalimpong branch personally mentions that as per order of the Ld. Forum, the bank in the computerised system has already closed the respondent’s SB A/c 20169394538 and the fund balance of that account has already transferred to respondent’s another SB A/c no: - 0031323079600.

The printed computerised bank statement dated also 31/01/2019 speaks the same.

            Thus the appeal is here by disposed of in the following manner.

Hence it is ordered: -

            That the appeal be and the same is partly allowed ex parte and on merit. Direction of the Ld. Forum to update savings bank account no. 20169394538 of the respondent and then to close the said account after transferring the remaining balance amount in the respondents other account no. 31323079600 is hereby confirmed. The amount of compensation as directed by the Ld. Forum to pay Rs. 25,000 by appellant is hereby reduced to Rs. 5,000/-. And the litigation cost as awarded Rs. 20,000 to be reduced as Rs. 5,000. The remaining ordering portion of the Ld. Forum remains the same. The copy of this order by supplied to the parties free of cost and the order be communicated to the Ld. Forum through e-mail.