Karnataka

Bidar

CC/40/2015

Umesh S/o Keshavrao Kulkarni - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank of India Bidar - Opp.Party(s)

Sheshadri Jaishankar.M.Adv

31 Jan 2017

ORDER

::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

AT BIDAR::

 

 

                                                                                                                 C.C.No. 40/2015

 

                                                                                                  Date of filing : 15/05/2015

 

                                                                                             Date of disposal : 31/01/2017

 

 

P R E S E N T:-                    (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,

                                                                                         B.A., LL.B.,

                                                                                                       President.

    

                                              (2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),

                                                                                 B.A.LL.B.,

                                                                                           Member.

 

                                   

 

                                               

COMPLAINANT/S:           1. Umesh, s/o Keshavrao Kulkarni,

                                       Age: 34 years, Occ: Private service,

                                        R/o Bidar.

 

                                    2. Anuradha @ Sangeeta, D/o Late Keshavrao

                                        Kulkarni, Age 32 years, Occ: Household,

                                               R/o Bidar.

              

                                    3. Mahesh, S/o Late Keshavrao Kulkarni,

                                               Age: 30 years, Occ: Private service.

                                               R/o Bidar.

 

 

 

              

 

 

                                     (By Shri. Sheshadri J.M., Advocate )

 

 

                                                      VERSUS

 

OPPONENT/S   :-               The Branch Manager,

                                         State Bank of India, main Branch,

                                            Bidar.

 

                                     

 

 

 

                                       (By Shri.Vilas Rao M.More Advocate)   

                                                

::   J UD G M E N T  : :

 

 

 

By Shri.Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

 

                The complainants have filed this case U/s.12 of the C.P.Act., 1986 against the Opponent which reads as hereunder.

 

2.                That the complainant no.1 is the elder brother of complainant no.2 and 3, and they are only sole legal heirs of  their deceased mother namely Hema @ Hemlatha @ Annapurnabai, w/o late Keshavrao Kulkarni, who was resident of Bidar.  The husband of  Smt. Hema @ Annapurnabai late Keshavrao Kulkarni was an employee in the Govt. Department and after the death of her husband,  Smt. Hema @ Annapurnabai,  w/o late Keshavrao Kulkarni had received his death claim benefit amount and kept the amounts in the form F.D. with the opponent Bank on different dates [Rs.40,000/- on 24-10-2005 vide receipt no. TD CS/0210545626, Rs. 40,000/- dt.24-10-2005 vide receipt no. TD CS/0-210545627 and Rs. 50,000 dt.07-02-2005 vide receipt no. 0679507] the total amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- was kept as fixed deposit with the opponent Bank with due nomination the said F.Ds.  were being  renewed from time to time in the opponent Bank.

 

3.       Complainants further avere that, due to old age their mother expired on 16/11/2011 leaving behind the complainants as legal heirs of deceased Hema @ Hemalatha @Annapurnabai.   After the death of the complainants’ mother they came to know that, during her life time  their mother was maintaining F.Ds. with the opponent Bank in a total sum of Rs. 1,30,000/-on different dates, with varied amounts.   Accordingly, the complainants had approached the O.P. Bank  to release F.D. amount.  After producing all relevant documents the O.P. Bank has not released the F.D. amount by offering vague reasons without verifying the documents.   The matter is prolonged on one or other reasons and also O.P. orally stated that, the  complainants’ mother’s name as mentioned in the death certificate and survival certificate as Annapurnabai, w/o Late Keshavrao Kulkarni  but, the name mentioned in the FD  as Hema Keshav Kulkarni therefore, the said F.D. amount could not be released in favour of complainants.  Despite, the complainants have shown all relevant documents, the O.P. Bank had not released the F.D. amount in favour of complainants and the O.P. had not disclosed the name of nominee of their mother which was mentioned in the FD. 

 

4.            The complainants further avered that, as per the records which clearly disclose that, prior to marriage of complainants’ deceased mother’s name was Hema D/o Bindurao Kulkarni which is evident from the S.S.L.C. marks card. After the marriage of the complainants’ mother the name had been changed as Annapurnabai as per traditions prevalent in the society. Further even though the complainants’ deceased mother’s name was mentioned in family Pension payment order which clearly depicts her name, as Annapurnabai @ Hemalata, w/o Late Keshavrao.  Therefore all three names belong to the complainants’ mother.   The complainants had approached several times with the documents to the O.P. Bank to release the F.D. amount.   Neither the O.P. Bank had not taken any pains to verify the documents nor considered the same.  The bank is sitting over the F.Ds.  It shows clearly deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.  Hence, the complainants have approached this Forum for their claim.

 

 

5.                In the meanwhile, versions was filed by O.P. therein, O.P. avered that, the complaint filed by the complainants is barred by limitation and the complaint is not maintainable since they have not submitted the documents which ensure that, the complainants are the legal heirs of Smt. Hema Keshav Kulkarni who had invested in  F.Ds.in her favour with the O.P.Bank.   In the light of this fact, the O.P. Bank herein deny the contents of para no.1& 2 of the complaint.  The contents of the para no.2 of the complaint are denied by the O.P. Bank with regard to the contention i.e. the death of Smt. Hema @ Annapurnabai on             16-11-2011.  The O.P. Bank is not having any such F.D. in the name of Smt.Hema @ Anapurnabai.  The death certificate produced by the complainant shows that, one Annapurnabai, w/o late Keshav Kulkarni had died on 08-08-2011.  But in  para no.2 of the  complaint they have shown the date of death of Smt.Hema @ Annapurnabai as 16-11-2011.  Further in the survival certificate issued by the Govt. of Karnataka therein the date of death of Smt. Hema @ Annapurnabai mentioned as 18-11-2011, even it goes to show that, the complainants are the legal heirs of Late Annapurnabai.  Had it been the fact that, deceased Smt.Hema Kulkarni was also known as Annapurnabai after the marriage, then in the death certificate and survival certificate her name should have been mentioned as Hema @ Annapurnabai.  The O.P. Bank is not having any such F.D. in the name of Smt.Hema @ Anapurnabai.

 

  6.                In reply to the para no.4 & 5  of the complaint regarding their deceased mother name as Smt.Hema D/o Bindurao Kulkarni and after her marriage, it had been changed as Annapurnabai.  To ensure their contention the complainants had relied on the family pension order wherein, the name appears as Smt.Annapurnabai @ Hemalata  Whereas, the other records including the S.S.L.C. certificate, fixed deposit receipts shows as Hema and not as Hemalata.  Therefore under such circumstances, it is highly impossible to believe that, the three names i.e. Hema, Hemalata and Annapurnabai belong to only one lady and the name shown in the fixed deposit belonging to the same lady.  As such the complainants have utterly failed to prove this fact and therefore they cannot claim their rights over the fixed deposit amount of Rs.1,30,000/-. Hence,  the O.P.Bank had  rightly not   entertained the request of the   complainants.   Therefore, there was no scope to raise question of deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. Bank for non payment of F.D. amount in favour of the complainants.

 

7.                  The O.P. further avers that, in case of release of F.D. amount in the name of legal heirs, as per the Succession Act, the legal heirs are supposed to bring the succession certificate from competent Civil Court and after production of succession certificate, the Bank can release the amount in favour of those persons.  In the instant case, in spite of request made by the respondent Bank to the complainants to bring the succession certificate from the Court of law to consider their claim.  The complainants have failed to bring the succession certificate showing that, they are the only legal heirs of deceased Smt. Hema and her name is deceased Hema @ Annapurnabai.  Therefore in view of the above fact, the Forum, may kindly be directed the complainant to produce the succession certificate showing that, they are the legal heirs of Hema, w/o Keshav Kulkarni and her other name is Annapurnabai.  Since the complainants have not brought any such order they have wrongfully filed the complaint before this Forum against involving the O.P. Bank in a litigation without any valid reasons and therefore the O.P. is entitled to claim an exemploary cost of Rs. 25,000/- from the person and property of the complainant.

 

 

 

8.         Considering the rival contentions of the parties, the following points arise for our consideration:-

 

1. Do the complainants prove that, there has been deficiency of service in the part of the Opponents?
2. Is the bank justified to refute the claim?
3. Do the complainants’ prove that, their deceased mother was known as Hema@ Hemalatha @ Annapurna Bai?
4. What Order?

 

 

 

 

 

9.           Our answers to the points stated above are as follows:-

 

               1. In the negative.

               2. In the affirmative.3

               3. In the affirmative.

               4. As per the final order, for the following:

 

 

                                                                                                   

    :: REASONS ::

 

10.           Factually, the opponent bank is put between two horns of the bull (dilemma).  In its records, the name of the depositor is different juxtaposed to the demands of the complainants.  Hence, no fault could be found in the part of the OP bank. 

 

11.                The opponent bank having come across with confusing claims was quite in the right to advise the complainants to approach a competent civil court.  The suggestion is in order and we don’t find fault in the actions of the bank in safeguarding public deposits.  Hence, we answer the points 1 and 2 accordingly.

12.                In the course of the proceedings, the complainants have examined one Dattaray S/o Bindurao Kulkarni, a BSNL employee, their maternal uncle who has testified in an affidavit as P.W.2 that, the names Hema @ Hemalatha @ Annapurna Bai belong to his elder sister and he was instrumental in filling up the A/C opening form of his late sister.  The accounts were opened in his presence.  He also vouches that, the complainants are the only legal heirs of the F.D. Account holder and none else.  A submission was made by the Ops counsel that, should this court pass on order to release the amount in favour of the complainants the bank would be pleased to do the same. Under the circumstances, we think it appropriate to hold that, in the orthodox, traditional society of India, adoption of different names, aliases, pseudonyms are most common, which is evident from the documents produced and it would be inhuman to subject the claimants to another exercise of succession certificate which is more methodical and time consuming.  Moreover the Revenue authorities have granted a legal heir certificate in favour of the complainants which has appropriate evidentiary value.  After all, the claimants fit in the shoes of the deceased investor as per section 2(1) (b) (v) of the C.P. Act, 1986, but still, we cannot be oblivious of the safeguards to be provided to the bank.  Hence we propose that, the complainants and their surety P.W.2 by name Dattaray S/o Bindurao Kulkarni, in the face of their deliberations indemnify the  OP bank from any future eventualities.  Hence holding the point NO.3 in the affirmative, we proceed to pas the following:-

 

:: ORDER ::

 

   

1.  The complaint is allowed in part.
2.  The OP bank is directed to release the F.D. amounts in favour of the complainant, provided they and their maternal uncle Sri Dattaray S/o Bindurao Kulkarni file a joint affidavit justifying their claims and executing a joint indemnity bond in favour of the OP bank, indemnifying the later in sum of Rs.5,00,000/- protecting it from all future eventualities. The documents have to be accompanied by proper identification of the executants.

 

 

3. There would be no order as to costs or otherwise in the face of the peculiar circumstances of the case.

 

4. Four weeks time granted to comply this order.

 

 

 

 

( Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 31^st  day of  January-2017 )

 

 

 

              Sd/-                                                                                   Sd/-

Sri. Shankrappa H.,                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad,                                  

       Member.                                                                   President.

 

                                                                                     

 

 

Documents produced by the complainant

1. Ex.P.1- Copy of Indemnity.
2. Ex.P.2-  Copy of election ID of Parshuram.
3. Ex.P.3-  Copy of ID of Sri Faheemuddin.
4. Ex.P.4- Copy of claim format.

5. Ex.P.5- Copy of affidavit.
6. Ex.P.6- Copy of DL of Sri Devendrappa.
7. Ex.P.7- Copy of affidavit.
8. Ex.P.8- Copy of survival certificate.
9. Ex.P.9- Copy of death certificate.
10. Ex.P.10 Copy of family pension order.
11. Ex.P.11 Copy of S.S.L.C. Marks card.
12. Ex.P.12 Copy of F.D. certificate.
13. Ex.P.13- Copy of F.D. certificate.
14. Ex.P.14 Copy of F.D. certificate.
15. Ex.P.15- Copy of letter of disclaimer.
16. Ex.P.16- Copy of I.D. card of Smt. Late Annapurna.
17. Ex.P.17- Copy of legal notice date: 28.10.2014.
18. Ex.P.18- Postal receipt originals.
19. Ex.P.19- Postal acknowledgement.
20. Ex.P.20- Family ration card.
21. Ex.P.21-Copy of Aadhar Card of Dattatraya (P.W.2)
22. Ex.P.22- Election Commissions I.D. Card of Dattatraya.
23. Ex.P.23- Copy of pass book in S.B.I. (cover page) of late Hema keshav
                  Kulkarni.
24. Ex.P.24- I.D. Card of D.B. Kulkarni issued by BSNL Ltd.

 

 Document produced by the Opponent/s

 

                 Nil

 

 

 

 

 

              Sd/-                                                                                   Sd/-

Sri. Shankrappa H.,                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad,                                   

       Member.                                                                   President.

 

 

mv.