DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No. 164/2021
Amanjit Singh Ahluwalia
S/o Late Sardar Harjit Ahluwalia,
R/o Plot G-28, Sector-56,
Noida, District- G.B. Nagar,
Pin code-201301 (Uttar Pradesh)
….Complainant
Versus
State Bank of India,
Personal Banking Branch,
Secretariat, Parliament Street, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001
….Opposite Party-1
Seema Tiwari
Assistant General Manager,
Personal Banking Branch,
New Delhi-110001 ….Opposite Party-2
Date of Institution : 12.04.21 Date of Order : 01.11.21
Coram:
Ms. Monika Srivastava, President
Sh. Umesh Kr. Tyagi, Member
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Author: Ms. Monika Srivastava, President
ORDER
Brief facts of the complaint as stated are:
Facts of the complaint as alleged by the complainant are that the Sister of complainant Mrs. Parminder Rekhi had taken a bank locker facility on rent and was allotted a locker No.1066 for the personal use of security. Thereafter, in the year 1982, Mrs. Parminder Rekhi, sister of the Complainant had moved to USA and attached/affixed the name of Complainant in the locker facility to operate it in future as either or survivor mode and authorized the Complainant to undertake the operation of bank locker. The complainant further states that after leaving India in 1982, Mrs. Parminder Rekhi had never operated the bank locker No.1066 and since then, the complainant had taken care of all the operations of bank locker.
It is the grievance of the Complainant that he visited the OP No.1 on several instances to operate his bank locker but the administration of the OP No.1 told him that bank locker was in unflawed condition since last seven years and that the Payment of rent is also due from 31.03.2015.
It is further the case of the complainant that OP No.1 told him about their policy regarding the payment of the rent for bank locker facility that “whoever wants to use the locker from OP No.1 or anyone using the bank locker facilities of OP No.1 then they must have their savings account in any branch of the OP No.1 and then only they are eligible to operate and make the payment of rent for the bank locker facility”.
Further, the complainant states that he had opened a saving bank account in Sector 35, Noida, Uttar Pradesh branch of OP No.1 to access and operate the bank locker, the details of these accounts were submitted to the OP No.1. However, the OP stated that the rent would be debited from his saving account but the complainant was unable to make the payment of rent from his saving account.
The complainant requested to make the payment of the locker in cash which was opposed by the OP No.1. Complainant then wrote an email on ‘sbi.04041@sbi.co.in’ to which OP No.1 ask the complainant to fulfill the KYC requirement of both the account holders stating that – “As one of the holders is residing overseas we have informed the option of getting KYC (any one address proof) attested from nearby SBI overseas branch or notarized from embassy; We request the holder staying in India to kindly visit the branch along with original KYC Document for verification of the same; Request should be sent from both the locker holders for change of standing instruction account number to 39682718039’.
This Commission is of the view there is no grievance against the OP which is made out in the complaint. OP is well within their rights to ask for compliance of KYC
Norms, and therefore, it is deemed fit that this complaint be dismissed as no grievance against the OP is made out in the present complaint.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
