Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/964/2022

CHETAN GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

STATE BANK OF INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

SANDEEP SINGH SANGWAN

02 Jan 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/964/2022
Date of Institution	:	8.12.2022
Date of Decision	:	2/1/2024

 

Chetan Gupta S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand  R/o H. No. 64/4 Birbal Nagar, Narwana, Tehsil, District Jind.

… Complainant(s)

V E R S U S

1. State Bank of India through its General Manager, Local Head office, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh 160017.

2.       Reserved Bank of India, Central Office, through its Managing Director, Building, 20^th floor Sahid Bhagat Singh Road Mumbai 400001.

3.       State bank of India Bus stand Narwana Branch, through its General Manager, Near Vishvkarama Chowk Bus Stand Narwana Distt. Jind, Haryana 126116.

4.       State Bank  Bhavan, Corporate Centre through its General Manager, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400021.

5.       State Bank of India (SBI) through its General Manager, Chandigarh Punjab and Haryana High Court Branch.

… Opposite Parties

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Sh. Kartik Permod Goyal, Advocate for complainant
	:	Sh. None for OPs No.1&4.
	:	OP No.2 exparte
	:	Sh. Arun Takhi, Advocate for OP No.3
	:	Sh. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for OP No.5

 

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the opposite parties  (hereinafter referred to as the OPs). The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the averments as projected in the consumer complaint that the complainant had opened his saving account No.20280759115 in State Bank of India, Narwana Branch in 2015 and the copy of first page of the passbook is Annexure C-1.  Thereafter
   the complainant opened recurring  Deposit (hereinafter to be referred as subject RD) through YONO Application of the State Bank of India  on August 26, 2021 with RD  No. 40393611139 and agreed to deposit Rs.2000/- per month  in 12 installments. Copy of details of subject RD is annexed as Annexure C-2. The aforesaid deposits were made through automatic way time to time installments regularly up to 26.7.2022 as per terms and conditions of the bank and the maturity date of subject RD was 27.8.2022 and the complainant wanted to close the RD account  and the bank had transferred the amount of RD in the account of the complainant. Due to illness of father of complainant he was in dire need of money and accordingly,  he used the YONO application  for the closure of the RD but it was found reflected in  the application as “ Unable to process your request at this time. Please try Later” . The complainant tried several times but he remained unsuccessful as every time it was reflected in the YONO Application “Unable to process your request at this time. Please try Later”. Thereafter the complainant visited the High Court Branch of the State bank of India to find out the solution and it was informed by the branch that the subject RD can be closed by the complainant through YONO application only. The complainant also talked to YONO customer care office  but with no result. Thereafter the complainant sent an application/complaint to State Bank of India and Reserve Bank of India but nothing was done by the officials of the said banks.  In this manner the complainant was harassed by the OPs by not providing service at such a time when the life of the complainant was in danger.  The aforesaid act of the OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part. OPs were requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result.  Hence, the present consumer complaint.
2. OPs No.1,3 and 4 resisted the consumer complaint and filed their written version, inter alia, taking preliminary objections of maintainabilityand concealment of fact. It is further submitted that the complainant has already received the entire RD amount and has earlier filed case before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. The subject RD amount of Rs.24,000/- alongwith interest  of Rs.597/-   has already been transferred through YONO Application and he was required to close the RD through the same application. On merits, the facts as stated in the preliminary objections have been re-iterated. The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
3. OP No.2 was properly served and when OP No.2 did not turn up before this Commission, despite proper service, it was proceeded against ex-parte on 22.2.2023.
4. OP No.5 in its reply took preliminary objection of maintainability, cause of action  and stated that the complainant himself failed to close the RD through YONO application and the entire amount has already been transferred in the account of the complainant. On merits, the facts as stated in the preliminary objections have been re-iterated. The cause of action set up by the complainant is denied.  The consumer complaint is sought to be contested.
5. Despite grant of numerous opportunities, no rejoinder was filed by the complainant to rebut the stand of the contesting OPs.

2. In order to prove their case, contesting parties have tendered/proved their evidence by way of respective affidavits and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the contesting parties and also gone through the file carefully.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the parties that the complainant was having saving account with OP No.3 and after opening the saving account he has also opened one RD account through YONO application with the same bank and through RD account the complainant agreed to deposit Rs.2000/- per month for one year through automatic debit from his saving account and an amount of Rs.24,000/-  was deposited in the RD account and the last installment was deducted on 26.7.2022 and the maturity date of the subject RD was 27.8.2022 and the said matured subject RD amount was further transferred by the OP No.3 in the saving account of the complainant on 8.9.2022, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if  there is deficiency on the part of OPs by not transferring the subject RD amount in the account of the complainant well in time and the complainant is entitled for relief as prayed for or if the RD amount transferred in the account of the complainant only when the complainant used the YONO application and the said amount could not be transferred to the account of the complainant before 8.9.2022 as the complainant has not used the YONO application thorough which he had opened the subject RD account and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs and the complaint is liable to be dismissed as is the  defence of contesting OPs.
   2. In the back drop of the foregoing admitted and disputed facts on record, it is clear that the entire case of the parties is revolving around Annexure C-2 RD details and Annexure R-2 the account statement, which are required to be scanned carefully in order to determine the real controversy   between the parties.
   3. Annexure C-2  indicates that the subject RD account was opened by the complainant on 26.8.2021  and the maturity date of the subject RD was 27.8.2022 and the said  maturity amount of Rs.24,597/-  was transferred in the account of the complainant on 8.9.2022 as is evident from Annexure R-2.
   4.  Learned counsel for the complainant  contended with vehemence that the OP had not transferred the said amount in the account of the complainant on 27.8.2022 when the subject RD was matured despite of repeated requests of the complainant and the complainant  was compelled to approach  the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court to redress his grievance, hence, the aforesaid act of OPs amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part.
   5. On the other hand the counsel for contesting OPs  contended that as it stands proved on record that the  subject RD was opened by the complainant by using YONO application and on maturity of RD the complainant was required to close the same through YONO application which he did only on 8.9.2022 and accordingly at that very moment the aforesaid maturity amount was transferred in the account of the complainant and thus, the complaint of the complainant being false and frivolous is not maintainable.. We find force in the contentions of the  learned counsel for the contesting OPs, as it is admitted case of the complainant that he had opened the recurring deposit account by using YONO application making it clear that the maturity amount of the subject RD was to be transferred in the complainant’s account only after closure of the same through YONO application only by the complainant himself.  The complainant has come with the specific allegation that every time when he tried to close the RD through YONO application it was found reflected in the said App “ Unable to process your request at this time. Please try Later”. However, the perusal of entire record indicates that the complainant has failed to prove any such message on the YONO APP rather Annexure C-3 is a medical prescription issued by the medical officer  in the name of the father of the complainant and not the extract of message as reflected on the Yono application as claimed by the complainant.

 The complainant has further come with the plea that he approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High court against the  OPs when he failed to get the matured amount from the OPs qua the transfer of the subject RD amount and the Hon’ble High court has disposed of the writ petition with specific direction to the concerned authorities. Perusal of Annexure C-4 clearly indicates that the Hon’ble High Court has  in fact disposed of the writ petition with  liberty to the petitioner to approach the OP No3  Sate Bank of India Narwana Branch within a period of two weeks  from the date of passing of order i.e. 8.9.2022 alongwith copy of the  petition which shall be treated as representation by the said bank and speaking order be passed by the competent authority within a period of two months from the date of receipt of  certified copy order. However, as the it stands proved on record that even before the submission of said copy of the order or copy of petition by the complainant, the said matured amount stood transferred in the account of the complainant on the same day,  when the order was passed by the Hon’ble High Court and knowing fully well that the subject amount has already been transferred in the saving account of the complainant, the  complainant has filed the instant complaint after about 3 months of the receipt of the aforesaid amount,   it is unsafe to hold that there is any deficiency on the part of the OPs especially when it has come on record that the moment complainant used  the YONO application through which he opened the subject RD account, he received the matured amount in his saving account, hence, no cause of action survives against the OPs. Accordingly the complaint deserves dismissal.

4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
6. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced 2/01/2024 mp			Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
			Sd/-
			[Surjeet Kaur] Member