Haryana

Karnal

CC/616/2023

Madan Lal Katyal - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank Of India - Opp.Party(s)

Ashok Jain

30 Oct 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                         Complaint No. 616 of 2023

                                                         Date of instt.26.10.2023

                                                         Date of Decision:30.10.2023

 

Madan Lal Katyal aged 77 years son of Shri Sakhir Chand Katyal, resident of 40A Neel Nagar, Nilokheri Township (45/1), Nilokheri, Karnal (Haryana). Aadar no.6085 0095 4620 mobile no.98961-36099.

 

                                                 …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. State Bank of India, through its Regional Manager, Sector-7, Bank Square Chandigrh.

 

2. Branch Manager, State Bank of India Gol Market, Nilokheri, Tehsil Nilokheri, District Karnal.

                                                                    …..Opposite Parties.

 

      Complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

 

Before   Shri Jaswant Singh……President.     

      Shri Vineet Kaushik ………..Member

      Dr. Suman Singh…Member

 

 Present: Shri Ashok Jain, counsel for the complainant.

                                        

                (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                Complaint presented today. It be checked and registered.

2.                    The complainant has filed the present complaint u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that the wife of complainant Smt. Urmil Katyal was holder of Bank looker no.100 at State Bank of India, Nilokheri. During her life time she executed a registered Will dated 28.02.2020, declaring her husband Madan Lal Katyal as sole rightful person over her properties including bank locker which is in State Bank of India Nilokheri and authorizing him to operate the said locker after her death and further declaring that her sons and daughter or their children or any other would have no right, claim or concern of any kind accept her husband.  Wife of complainant expired on 07.09.2021, leaving behind her husband/complainant and three children namely Gagan Katyal and Ripul Katyal both sons PR holder of USA and a married daughter namely Puja as her LRs and successor in interest. After the death of his wife, complainant on the basis of Will dated 28.02.2020 applied to the Bank/OPs for operation and transfer of the locker in his name. However, the bank/OPs postpone the matter on one pretext or the other and vide his officer order dated 03.08.2022 has illegally and unlawfully rejected the prayer of the complainant for transfer and operating of the locker and directed the complainant to submit the Probate of Will. The complainant through his counsel issued a legal notice dated 13.10.2022 to the OPs permit him to operate the locker and for transfer the same in his name. The complainant also made so many visits to the bank for transfer of the locker and permit him to operate the locker. A reply/response to the legal notice dated 29.11.2022 has been submitted and again, it is repeated that probate of Will is required. The complainant through his counsel again submitted reply dated 03.12.2022 to the OP bank that wife of complainant has got the registered Will in his favour with the intention that no further problem would arise after her death. Further calling of probate is uncalled for. None of the LRs has challenged the Will and made any representation to the Bank nor instituted any case in this regard. The bank cannot permit to pre-empt the things of future.

3.             It is further averred that according to Section 222 of the Indian succession Act 1926, the probate shall be granted only to an Executor appointed by the Will. According to information available on ‘Internet’ in this regard, Probate means the copy of Will certified under the seal of a court of competent jurisdiction with a grant of administration of the estate of testator. A probate can be granted only to executor appointed under the Will. Further a probate is essential if Will is for immoveable assets in multiple states”. However, there is no such executor by way of express or any implication has been appointed. Thus, the question of seeking probate of Will by the bank is totally unjustified and uncalled for. There is no issue of any kind raised by any legal heir and nor any representation has ever submitted to the bank by any person in this regard.

4.             Further, the complainant by now found to have suffered from blood cancer and at the verge of end of his life. Feeling harassed and humiliated from the behavior of the bank/OPs, he preferred CWP no.8520 of 2023 before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh which has disposed of vide order dated 25.04.2023 with the liberty to the complainant to take recourse to the alternative efficacious remedy in accordance with law. Complainant moved an application dated 26.05.2023, to the bank/OPs with the request to permit him to operate/open the bank locker. However, bank/OPs once again, vide order dated 12.06.2023 illegally and arbitrarily rejected the request of the complainant and insist upon to seek probate of the Will. The complainant thereafter again preferred CWP no.15973 of 2023 before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh against Bank, which has dismissed on 27.07.2023 for the reasons and noticing that efficacious alternative remedies including remedies under the Consumer Protection Act for seeking redressal of the said grievance are available to the petitioner. The petitioner may, if so advised, take recourse to the alternative remedies available to him in accordance with law. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

 

 5.            Arguments on the point of admissibility heard. Record perused.

6.             As per version of the complainant, the wife of complainant namely Urmil Katyal (since deceased) during her life time executed a registered Will dated 28.02.2020, declaring her husband Madan Lal Katyal as sole rightful person over her properties including bank locker which is in State Bank of India Nilokheri and authorizing him to operate the said locker after her death.  Wife of complainant expired on 07.09.2021. After the death of his wife, complainant on the basis of Will dated 28.02.2020 applied to the Bank/OPs for operation and transfer of the locker in his name but the bank/OPs postpone the matter on one pretext or the other and vide his officer order dated 03.08.2022 has illegally and unlawfully rejected the prayer of the complainant for transfer and operating of the locker and directed the complainant to submit the Probate of Will. Learned counsel for the complainant also relied upon the order passed by Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh, whereby it has been held that “Counsel for the petitioner has failed to counter that the banking services is covered under the Legal Services Authority Act, as well as under the Consumer Protection Act for seeking redressal of the said grievance. Apart there from a parallel grievance redressal mechanism under the Banking Regulations in the form of Banking Ombudsman has also been notified by the State Government”.  Learned counsel for the complainant relied upon the case law titled as Joginder Pal Versus Indian Red Cross society in Civil appeal no.5664 of 2000, date of decision 29.09.2000 of Hon’ble Supreme Court.

7.             As per the arguments of learned counsel for the complainant, the legal heirs of the Executant of the Will are resides in foreign country. In this case, the notice for General Public is also required to be served. The question of seeking probate of Will is required elaborate evidence and same cannot be decided in summary process under Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Hence, the best platform to decide the matter in dispute is the Civil Court where elaborate and detailed testimony can be produced by the parties. In this regard, we are placed reliance upon the observations made in case titled as Love Motels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh 2007 (4) CPJ Page 305 (NC) wherein it has been observed by the Hon’ble National Commission that complicated issues involved, not adjudicable summarily-Dismissed with liberty to seek remedy in Civil Court. Further, in case titled as M/s The Bills through its Proprietor Versus PNB reported in 1998 (1) CPC page 150, decided by Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh it has been held that complicated issues being involved, the matter needs to be decided Civil Court-Complaint stands dismissed. Furthermore, the complainant has already approached the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court twice on the same cause of action. Hon’ble High Court in its order dated 27.07.2023 has observed that:

“apart therefrom a parallel grievance redressal mechanism under the Banking Regulations in the form of Banking Ombudsman has also been notified by the State Government. Filing of the present petition is clearly under a wrong advice. The present petition is accordingly dismissed at this stage for the above reasons and noticing that efficacious alternative remedies are available to the petitioner. The petitioner may, if so advised, take recourse to the alternative remedies available to him in accordance with law”.

8.            Thus, in view of the above, the present complaint is not maintainable before the Commission and same deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed in limini. As discussed above, the complainant is at liberty to approach the Ombudsman/Civil Court, for his grievances. Party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced
Dated: 30.10.2023 

  President,       

District Consumer Disputes                          

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

 

                  (Vineet Kaushik)              (Dr. Suman Singh)                                   

                   Member                             Member