BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM:: AT KHAMMAM Dated this, the 24th day of June, 2009 Coram: 1. Sri.Vijay Kumar, B.Com., LL.B., President 2. Sri.K.V.Kaladhar, B.Sc., B.L., Member C.C.No.43/2009 Between: Babburi Venkateswarlu, S/o.Bhadraiah, age: 45 years, occu: Government Teacher, (School assistant) Z.P.H.S.School, Jalagam Nagar, R/o.Mamillagudem Street, Khammam District. …Complainant and State Bank of Hyderabad, Zilla Parishad Branch, Khammam town and District, rep. by its Branch Manager. …Opposite party. This C.C. came before us for final hearing on 16-6-2009 in the presence of Sri.B.Ramesh, Advocate for complainant and of Sri.A.V.Ramanujacharyulu, Advocate for opposite party; upon hearing the arguments and upon perusing the material papers on record, having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following order: O R D E R (per Sri. Vijay Kumar, President) 1. This complaint is filed u/s.12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is working as Government Teacher, that on 7-5-2009 the complainant opened a savings Bank Account bearing A/c.No.62096853456 with the opposite party bank and in turn the opposite party handed over the pass book showing the account in favour of the complainant. That on 7-5-2009 the Salary Disbursing Officer of Z.P.S.School, Jalagam Nagar, Khammam rural mandal, Khammam District deposited a cheque bearing No.771461, dt.7-5-2009 for an amount of Rs.50,916/- in the S.B.H., Try Branch, Khammam-950 for the credit of the complainant towards salary for three months and the same was credited in the account of the complainant as balance available. The complainant wanted to incur the said amount for the treatment of his father, who was ailing with heart disease and presented the withdrawal slip, but the opposite party bank returned the with drawl slip, on the ground that they withheld the account as per the instructions of higher authorities and unless the higher authorities issue further orders with regard to withdrawal, they will not give a single pie to the complainant. The authorities of Gandhi Chowk Branch ordered to seize the account, to realize the personal loan amount obtained by the complainant in the year, 2005, the bank has provided the loan to the complainant after executing one employee’s surety, who got own house and obtained signatures on blank promissory notes, blank cheques and more than 20 to 40 papers and therefore withholding the account is unauthorized and illegal. This act on the part of opposite party amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, the complaint. 2. On receipt of the notice, the opposite party appeared and filed counter and admitted that the complainant has presented a cheque for an amount of Rs.50,916/- and also admitted that the opposite party withheld the account of complainant as per the advice of higher authorities. In fact the complainant had availed personal loan from State Bank of Hyderabad, Gandhi Chowk Branch, Khammam vide it’s A/c.No.52114413470 for an amount of Rs.50,000/- and also availed personal loan from S.B.H., Yellandu Branch, Khammam District vide it’s A/c.No.62089912912 for an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- on 22-1-2009. The complainant did not pay the installments and his loan accounts went to NPA and he is due an amount of Rs.45,273.16 Ps. without interest from 1-3-2006 onwards at S.B.H. Gandhi Chowk Branch, Khammam and also due an amount of Rs,2,03,328/- as on 30-4-2009 at S.B.H., Yellandu Branch. As such the amount will not be realized unless and until the outstanding amounts are cleared of and prayed to dismiss the complaint. 3. On behalf of the complainant, he filed Xerox copy of the pass book issued by the opposite party, which is marked as Ex.A.1 and Xerox copy of cheque bearing No.771461 dt.7-5-2009 for Rs.50,916/- marked as Ex.A.2. 4. On behalf of the opposite party, Xerox copy of personal loan agreement executed by complainant for an amount of Rs.50,000/-, which is marked as Ex.B.1, statement of Account of Yellandu Branch, showing due for Rs.2,03,328/-, which is marked as Ex.B.2 and Xerox copy of statement of Account of Gandhi chowk Branch, showing due for Rs.45,273.16Ps, which is marked as Ex.B.3 filed. 5. Heard oral arguments from both sides. The counsel for opposite party filed written arguments. Perused the oral and documentary evidence, upon which the point that arose for consideration is, 1. Whether the opposite party is empowered to withhold the balance amount of the complainant? 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation? 3. To what relief? Points No.1 to 3: 6. It is not in dispute that the complainant had opened the S.B.Account with opposite party and an amount of Rs.50,913/- is shown as balance in his credit. It is also not in dispute that the opposite party has seized the said balance amount of complainant and refused to honour the withdrawal slip on the ground that the complainant is due to the opposite party bank as in Exs.B.2 to B.3. 7. Now the question arose for consideration is, whether the opposite party can seize the amount of complainant in realization of due amount without availing the legal remedies. On this aspect of the case, the learned counsel for the opposite party placed reliance to a decision reported in AIR 1992 Supreme Court 1066. In the above citation, their lordships have expressed their opinion under order 21 rule 46(a) of CPC. It is the case of attachment on deposit amount, when an attachment notice is served, J.D.R. has to appear before the court and obtain suitable direction, for safeguarding its interest. This became clear from the perusal of Order 21 Rule 46(a), the court in such a situation has to take into account the bankers lien over the securities of deposities. 8. But here in the instant case, no such decree is obtained by opposite party for realization of the amount of complainant unless there is a direction by a Civil Court for seizing of amount or attachment of amount, the bank can not interfere suo-moto by withholding the amount. In the case on hand, the opposite party has seized the balance amount of complainant sue-moto without availing the legal remedies. It is not known what is the amount due by the complainant. Let the civil court pass a decree then the opposite party is empowered to attach the balance amount of complainant in realization of due amount. Such power of seizure is not sue-moto vested with the opposite party bank. What is attached is the money in the deposit account. The opposite party has to appear before the court and obtain a suitable direction for safeguarding its interest. In the instant case, the complainant has already executed the surety and also an agreement in favour of opposite party Bank as in Ex.A.1 and A.2. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the action of opposite party in withholding amount of complainant is not justified. Hence, the complaint is allowed. We direct the opposite party to pay the balance amount of Rs.50,913/- to the complainant together with interest at the rate of 9% P.A. from the date of deposit, till the date of payment within a period of one month from the date of this order and further directed to pay the amount of Rs.5,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony suffered by the complainant and to pay Rs.1,000/- towards costs of the litigation. The opposite party is advised to take legal steps for realization of the due amount. Dictated to the steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum on 24th day of June, 2009. PRESIDENT MEMEBR DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM KHAMMAM Witnesses examined for complainant: -Nil- Witnesses examined for opposite parties: -Nil- Exhibits marked for complainant: Ex.A.1 - Xerox copy of the pass book issued by the opposite party Ex.A.2 - Xerox copy of cheque bearing No.771461 dt.7-5-2009 for Rs.50,916/- Exhibits marked for opposite parties: Ex.B.1 - Xerox copy of personal loan agreement executed by complainant for an amount of Rs.50,000/- Ex.B.2 - Statement of Account of Yellandu Branch, showing due for Rs.2,03,328/-, Ex.B.3 - Xerox copy of statement of Account of Gandhi chowk Branch, showing due for Rs.45,273.16Ps . PRESIDENT MEMEBR DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM KHAMMAM |
