THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR
Consumer Complaint No. 632 of 14
Date of Institution : 2.12.2014
Date of Decision : 05.05.2015
Kamla Rani aged 79 years wife of late Sh. Ram Nath R/o 2128/8, Abadi Gokal Chand, Near Shakti Nagar, Amritsar
...Complainant
Vs.
State Bank of India, Dhab Wasti Ram Branch,Amritsar through its branch manager
Deputy General Manager & Development Officer, State Bank of India, Local Head Office, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh
The Chairman , State Bank of India, Central Office, Nariman point, Mumbai
The Chief Manager (C.S.P.P.C) State Bank of India, Kolkata
....Opp.parties
Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present : For the complainants : Sh. Anil Sharma,Adv
For the opposite parties : Sh. Talwinder Singh,,Adv.
Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
Order dictated by :-
-2-
Bhupinder Singh, President
1 Present complaint has been filed by Kamla Rani under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that she is a widow and a Senior Citizen and is getting pension under SBI Family Pension Account No. 10057720473 with State Bank of India i.e. opposite party No.1. According to the complainant she has been getting family pension from the opposite party No.1 regularly till July 2011 and thereafter the opposite party No.1 stopped making payment of family pension to the complainant. The complanant approached the opposite party Bank many times and requested the banch manager to release the family pension, but opposite party No.1 failed to give any satisfactory reply to the complainant. Then the complainant brought the matter to the notice of Chairman, SBI i.e. opposite party No.3 via e-mail dated 30.9.2013 who further forwarded the matter to CGM, SBI Chandigarh for necessary action. Opposite party No.1 in response to notice of opposite party No.3 explained that the pension has been stopped due to non submission of life certificate. Complainant has alleged that she continuously submitted her life certificate in the month of November every year. Thereafter the arrears of her pension was credited to the account of the complainant . But entire dues of family pension was not released by the opposite parties and was still in arrears. Then complainant received a letter dated 7.10.2013 that the pension from August 2011 to March 2012 was not paid earlier due to shifting of pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta. The arrears of pension was deposited in the account of the complainant on October 2013 and as such there is a delay of more than two years , as such the complainant is entitled to claim interest @ 15% p.a on the delayed payment . Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to pay interest on the delayed payment of arrears for a period of 24 months. Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that anybody who receives pension, is asked to come present in the bank after one year i.e. in the month of November every year for filing life certificate to prove that whether the pensioner is alive or has not been remarried ? In the present case complainant did not come present before the opposite party No.1 bank to file life certificate. The complainant has been withdrawing the money through ATM and never visited the bank. In the month of August 2013 when the balance of the complainant became very low, the complainant came to bank and enquired about the reason, then she was informed that she has to sign the life certificate in the month of November every year to prove that she is alive and has not remarried . The complainant signed the life certificate on 20.8.2013 and immediately her arrears were cleared. However, the complainant is not entitled for any interest of non payment of pension due to her negligence and there is no deficiency on the part of the opposite parties.
3. Complainant tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, copy of speed post dated 20.8.2013 Ex.C-1, copy of speed post dated 31.8.2013 Ex.C-2, copy of e-mail Ex.C-3 and C-4, copy of letter served by SBI Ex.C-5, copy of e-mail Ex.C-6, copy of e-mail Ex.C-7, copy of letter dated 21.2.2014 Ex,.C-8, copy of e-mail Ex.C-9, copy of letter dated 11.3.2014 Ex.C-10, copy of passbook Ex.C-11.
4. Opposite parties No. 1 to 3 tendered affidavit of Sh. H.C. Sarangal Ex.OP1, copy of document Ex.OP2, copy of document Ex.OP3, copy of letter dated 18.3.2010 Ex.OP4, copy of life certificate Ex.OP5, copy of letter dated 7.10.2013 Ex.OP6, letter dated 15.10.2013 Ex.OP7, letter dated 19.3.2014 Ex.OP8.
5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for both the parties
6. From the record i.e.pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant Kamla Rani wd/o Late Sh. Ram Nath has SBI Family Pension Account No. 10057720473 with opposite party No.1. The complainant has been getting family pension from opposite party No.1 regularly upto July 2011 through the aforesaid account but thereafter opposite party No.1 stopped the family pension of the complainant without assigning any reason nor any intimation was given by the opposite party to the complainant. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 bank and also write letters/representations to opposite parties i.e. letter dated 20.8.2013 Ex.C-1, letter dated 31.8.2013 Ex.C-2, letter dated 30.9.2013 through e-mail Ex.C-3 and other correspondence through e-mail Ex.C-4, but the opposite parties did not release the family pension to the complainant. However, the complainant received letter from the opposite party dated 7.10.2013 Ex,.C-5 in which the opposite party submitted that the family pension was stopped by the bank due to non submission of life certificate which has to be given in the month of November every year. The complainant has submitted the life certificate on 20.8.2013 and the pension from April 2012 to August 2013 have been already credited in the account of the complainant on 27.8.2013. The pension for the month of September 2013 has been credited on 26.9.2013. The pension from August 2011 to March 2012 will be credited to the account of the complainant with the pension of October 2013. The opposite party submitted that the pension from August 2011 to March, 2012 was not paid earlier because due to shifting of pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta . The pension payment cell of the opposite party advised to their Calcutta office for payment of the pension for the said period in the month of October 2013. The opposite party further informed that interest of delayed payment cannot be paid as the fault is on the part of the pensioner due to non submission of life certificate. The opposite parties sent letter dated 21.2.2014 Ex.C-8 to the complainant in which they submitted that the arrears from August 2011 to March 2012 have been credited to the account of the complainant on 25.10.2013. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that the opposite parties cannot stop the family pension of the complainant in the month of August 2011 due to non supply of life certificate which is to be supplied in November 2011 and the opposite parties as per instructions can stop the payment of family pension for non submission of life certificate in February 2012. But here in this case the opposite parties have admitted that they could not pay the family pension to the complainant from August 2011 to March 2012 due to shifting of pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta. So that was due to fault on the part of the opposite parties, as such the complainant has not been paid pension from August 2011 to March 2012 without interest to the complainant and the same was paid to the complainant on 25.10.2013 as per letter of the opposite parties dated 21.2.2014 Ex.C-8. All this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
7. Whereas the case of the opposite parties is that anybody who receives pension, has been asked to come present in the bank after one year i.e. in the month of November every year for filing life certificate to prove that whether the pensioner is alive or has not been remarried ? In the present case complainant did not come present before the opposite party No.1 bank to file life certificate. The complainant has been withdrawing the money through ATM and never visited the bank. In the month of August 2013 when the balance of the complainant became very low, the complainant came to bank and enquired about the reason, then she was informed that she has to sign the life certificate in the month of November every year . The complainant signed the life certificate on 20.8.2013 and immediately her arrears were cleared. So there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.
8. From the entire above discussion , we have come to the conclusion that as per the instructions of the opposite party bank as admitted by the opposite parties in their written version (para 2 on merits), the pensioner has to file life certificate in the month of November every year to prove whether the pensioner is alive or has not been remarried and if the pensioner does not come present to the opposite party bank to furnish life certificate, then her pension is not paid w.e.f February of the next year. But in this case the opposite party No.1 paid the pension to the complainant upto July 2011 which means complainant was entitled to get family pension without furnishing life certificate (which was to be furnished in November 2011) , upto January, 2012. But the opposite parties have stopped the family pension of the complainant and did not make the payment of family pension to the complainant for the months of August, September, October , November, December and January which the opposite party was bound to pay to the complainant even without furnishing the life certificate which was due to be furnished by the complainan in November 2011. So the opposite party was not justified in with-holding the family pension of the complainant for the month of August 2011 onwards upto January, 2012 and all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party No.1 bank.
9. No doubt the opposite parties have submitted that pension for the period from August 2011 to March 2012 was not paid earlier due to shifting of pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta as mentioned in letter Ex.C-5 dated 7.10.2013 . But the opposite party could not produce any evidence regarding the shifting of the pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta. Even though if the opposite parties have shifted the pension record from Chandigarh to Calcutta, opposite party was not justified in with-holding the pension of the complainan for so many months i.e. from August 2011 to March 2012 which was paid to the complainant on 25.10.2013 (after about one and half year) as per letter dated 21.2.2014 Ex.C-8. The opposite party was,therefore , not justified in with-holding the pension of the complainant from August 2011 to January, 2013. However, the opposite party is justified to with-hold family pension of the complainant w.e.f February 2012 to August 2013 when the complainant furnished life certificate which was to be furnished by the complainant in November 2011. Therefore, the opposite party was not at fault in with-holding the family pension of the complainant from February 2012 to August 2013. However, the opposite partyb was totally un-justified in with-holding the family pension of the complainant from August 2011 to January 2012. No doubt the opposite party No.1 has since released the entire arrears of pension to the complainant and paid the arrears of family pension of the complainant from August 2011 to March 2012 on 20.10.2013 i.e. after a delay of more than one and half year. So the opposite party is certainly in deficiency of service towards the complainant.
10. Consequently we hold that complainant is entitled to compensation for this unjustified act of with-holding the family pension of the complainant from August 2011 to January 2012. As such the complainant is entitled to compensation due to harassment the complainant has suffered because family pension is the only source of livelihood for the complainant as she is widow and Sr. Citizen.
11. Resultantly we partly allow the complaint and the opposite party is directed to pay compensation of Rs. 10000/- and litigation expenses Rs. 1000/- to the complainant. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
05.5.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
/R/ Member Member
