Jammu and Kashmir

Jammu

CC/494/2017

UPASANA KATHAIL SHARMA - Complainant(s)

Versus

STATE BANK OF INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

GOVIND RAINA

07 Mar 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,JAMMU

(Constituted under J&K Consumer Protection Act,1987)

                                                          .

 Case File  No                 401/DFJ           

 Date of  Institution   21-01-2014

 Date of Decision          28 - 02-2018

 

Smt.Upasana Kathail Sharma,

W/O Sh.B.M.Sharma,

R/O H.No.5 Sector-3 Extension,

Trikuta Nagar,Jammu.

                                                                                                                                                Complainant

                V/S

1.State Bank of India,

  Through its Chief General Manager,

 Local Head Office,Sector-17,

Chandigarh.

2.The Deputy General Manager,

State Bank of India,Administrative Office,

Railway Road,Jammu.

3.The Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,Railway Station Branch,

Jammu.

                                                                                                                                                                Opposite parties

CORAM

                  Khalil Choudhary              (Distt.& Sessions Judge)  President

                  Ms.Vijay Angral                                                               Member

                  Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chouhan                                       Member

 

In the matter of  Complaint under section 10 of J&K Consumer

                              Protection Act 1987.

      

Mr.Govind Raina,Advocate for complainant, present

Mr.Parveen Kapai,Advocate for OPs,present.

 

                                                                     ORDER.

                   Relevant facts as are discernible from the complaint are that the complainant is maintaining Saving Bank Account No.10026797057 with State Bank of India at its branch office Railway Station, Jammu and has made different banking transaction through this account for her personal convenience and had made some savings from her hard earned money and the amount was kept in the Saving Bank account to meet the unforeseen expenditure of the education and marriage of her children. Complainant further submitted that as and when she visited the bank, the officials of OP3 always pursued and influenced her to keep the amount in Fixed Deposits Account which carries more interest instead of keeping it in the Saving Bank Account with a lower rate of interest, complainant fell into the prey of the officials of bank who motivated her to keep Rs.1,50,000/-in her name in Fixed Deposit bearing No.30490525649 dated 13-09-2008 for a period of 59 months falling due for maturity on 13-08-2013 with maturity amount of Rs.2,40,897/-and the bank agreed to pay interest at the rate 7 percentt ,copy of Fixed Deposit Receipt issued by OP bank is annexed as Annexure-A.According to complainant, the officials of said bank assured her to open a fixed deposit account which will fetch a higher rate of interest i.e.@ 9.75% which is higher than the interest paid on Saving Bank Account which carries interest @ 4.50% p.a.and had shown very attractive calculations to suit the eyes of complainant. Allegation of complainant is that her daughter was studying in 12^th Class at the time of making deposit with the bank with a view to meet the expenditure for higher studies and marriage of her daughter. Complainant further submitted that all of a sudden the marriage of her daughter was fixed on 19-10-2013,she went to the bank to get the payment of the amount of Fixed Deposit Receipt from the bank, so as to make purchases and also make payments to the suppliers at the marriage function and the services rendered at the time of marriage, copy of marriage card is annexed as Annexure-B,but on enquiry she was surprised to find out that the amount deposited in the Fixed Deposit had been withdrawn, as such she was put in an embarrassing position before the creditors and also the family members. Complainant further submitted that the Fixed Deposits receipt had been broken before the date of maturity by the Ops without any written request and the original Fixed Deposit Receipt is still lying with her and it is well settled principle of law that once the instrument has been made for a fixed period of time, it cannot be break-opened before the date of maturity except on a written request of the depositor, but the concerned official has himself break-opened the Fixed Deposit Receipt before the date of maturity. Complainant further submitted that she took up the matter with the Branch Manager ,who did not cooperate in making payment and aggrieved by the non-cooperative attitude of Branch Manager, complainant was compelled to approach  higher authorities of the bank through e.mail,who assured that the matter will be redressed as the senior authorities had taken up the matter with the Railway Station Jammu Branch,      copy of e.mail and the response received from the bank authorities are annexed as Annexure-C.Constrained by the act of Ops,complainant served a legal notice to Ops for causing loss due to break open of the Fixed Deposit Receipt without any instructions for the same  and in response to the said notice a reply has been served to her, but no claim has been settled by Ops and this act of Ops constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the present complaint. In the final analysis, complainant prays for payment of Rs.2,40,897/-and in addition also prays for compensation of Rs.1,55,000/-including litigation charges.

          On the other hand,Ops filed written version and submitted that FDR for Rs.1.50 lacs was issued in favour of complainant on,13-09-2008,which was to be matured on,13-08-2013,whereas complainant approached Ops on,17-08-2009 that she was in need of money for making payment to third party and on,17-08-2009 there was balance of Rs.41,620.51 in complainant saving account, copy of statement is annexed as Annexure-A. The Ops further submitted that complainant requested orally to Ops to credit the amount of FDR in her saving account pre-maturely as she was in need of money for payment to third party and on request of complainant, the amount of FDR was prematurely realized and an amount of Rs.1,84,724/-were credited to her saving account which includes the interest amount on the said FDR and on the same date i.e.17-08-2009 complainant had issued cheque No.036589 for Rs.2,00,500/-duly signed by the complainant and on the back of the cheque it was endorsed that a draft may be made favouring Estate Office Galada Ludhiana for Rs.2.00 lacs only. The draft was prepared on the instructions of complainant after crediting the amount of FDR in her saving account operated by the complainant in the branch of answering Ops,copy of cheques dated 17-08-2009 and the endorsement for preparing of draft of Rs.2.00 lacs is annexed.The Ops further submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops while performance of their duties in this case. Lastly it is prayed that complaint may be dismissed.

                Complainant adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavit and affidavits of Brij Monan Sharma and Inderjit Gupta,respectively.Complainant has placed on record copy of Fixed Deposit Receipt, copy of marriage card, copies of e.mails,copy of notice and copy of response of legal notice.

           On the other hand,Ops adduced evidence by way of duly sworn evidence affidavit of Manjit Singh Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Railway Branch Jammu.Ops have placed on record copy of statement of account, copy of cheque and endorsement and copy of draft.

         We have perused case file and heard L/Cs for the parties at length.

              Briefly stated grievance of complainant is that she is maintaining Saving Bank Account No.10026797057 with State Bank of India at its branch office Railway Station, Jammu and has made different banking transaction through this account for her personal convenience and had made some savings from her hard earned money and the amount was kept in the Saving Bank account to meet the unforeseen expenditure of the education and marriage of her children. Complainant further submitted that as and when she visited the bank, the officials of OP3 always pursued and influenced her to keep the amount in Fixed Deposits Account which carries more interest instead of keeping it in the Saving Bank Account with a lower rate of interest, complainant fell into the prey of the officials of bank who motivated her to keep Rs.1,50,000/-in her name in Fixed Deposit bearing No.30490525649 dated 13-09-2008 for a period of 59 months falling due for maturity on 13-08-2013 with maturity amount of Rs.2,40,897/-and the bank agreed to pay interest @ 7%,and the officials of said bank assured her to open a fixed deposit account which will fetch a higher rate of interest i.e.@ 9.75% which is higher than the interest paid on Saving Bank Account which carries interest @ 4.50% p.a.and had shown very attractive calculations to suit the eyes of complainant. Allegation of complainant is that her daughter was studying in 12^th Class at the time of making deposit with the bank with a view to meet the expenditure for higher studies and marriage of her daughter. Complainant further submitted that all of a sudden the marriage of her daughter was fixed on 19-10-2013,she went to the bank to get the payment of the amount of Fixed Deposit Receipt from the bank, so as to make purchases, but on enquiry she was surprised to find out that the amount deposited in the Fixed Deposit had been withdrawn, as such she was put in an embarrassing position before the creditors and also the family members. Complainant further submitted that the Fixed Deposits receipt had been broken before the date of maturity by the Ops without any written request and the original Fixed Deposit Receipt is still lying with her and it is well settled principle of law that once the instrument has been made for a fixed period of time, it cannot be break-opened before the date of maturity except on a written request of the depositor, but the concerned official has himself break-opened the Fixed Deposit Receipt before the date of maturity. Complainant further submitted that she took up the matter with the Branch Manager ,who did not cooperate in making payment and aggrieved by the non-cooperative attitude of Branch Manager, complainant was compelled to approach  higher authorities of the bank through e.mail,who assured that the matter will be redressed as the senior authorities had taken up the matter with the Railway Station Jammu Branch. Constrained by the act of Ops,complainant served a legal notice to Ops for causing loss due to break open of the Fixed Deposit Receipt without any instructions for the same  and in response to the said notice a reply has been served to her, but no claim has been settled by Ops and this act of Ops constitutes deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

          On the other hand,defence of Ops is that the complainant approached Ops on,17-08-2009 that she was in need of money for making payment to third party and on,17-08-2009 there was balance of Rs.41,620.51 in complainant saving account. The Ops further submitted that complainant requested orally to Ops to credit the amount of FDR in her saving account pre-maturely as she was in need of money for payment to third party and on request of complainant, the amount of FDR was prematurely realized and an amount of Rs.1,84,724/-were credited to her saving account which includes the interest amount on the said FDR and on the same date i.e.17-08-2009 complainant had issued cheque No.036589 for Rs.2,00,500/-duly signed by the complainant and on the back of the cheque it was endorsed that a draft may be made favouring Estate Office Galada Ludhiana for Rs.2.00 lacs only. The draft was prepared on the instructions of complainant after crediting the amount of FDR in her saving account operated by the complainant in the branch of answering Ops.The Ops further submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops while performance of their duties in this case. Lastly it is prayed that complaint may be dismissed.

                                Before heading further, it is to be noted that since parties have lead evidence in the shape of evidence affidavits, which are much or less reproduction of contents of their respective pleadings,therefore,we do not feel it necessary to represent the same again and if need arises, same would be referred hereinafter at appropriate stage.

                     It is to be noted that the complainant, with the permission of Forum has been cross-examined by rival parties. Complainant in his cross-examination deposed that she had an account No.00000010026797057 with State Bank of India Railway Branch Jammu. It is wrong that she was having an amount of Rs.41,620.51 P.on 17^th of August,2009 in the statement of Account. She had got booked a flat with Estate Officer Glada Ludhiana for Rs.2 lacs.She required money for booking of flat on 17-08-2009,Annexure-B with w.v/objections for Rs.2 lacs 500/-issued on 17-08-2009 and on the back of this cheque there is endorsement duly signed by her. He issued draft of Rs.2 lacs in favour of Estate Officer Glada Ludhian-Annexure-C alongwith objections/w.v.bears her signatures indicating issuance of draft of Rs. 2lacs 500 in favour of Estate Officer Glada Ludhiana.No further question.

               It is to be noted that issuance of FDR in favour of complainant  is not in dispute.However,complainant raised the dispute regarding withdrawal of amount deposited in the FDR  before the date of maturity by the bank without any written request on the part of complainant.

              On the other hand,Ops came up with the version that on the instruction of complainant amount of FDR was prematurely realized and an amount of Rs.1,84,724/-were credited to her saving account which includes the interest amount on the said FDR and on the same date 17-08-2009 complainant had issued cheque No.036589 for Rs.2,00,500/-duly signed by the complainant and on the back of this cheque it was endorsed that the  draft may be prepared for Rs.2.00 lacs favouring Estate Officer,Glada Ludhian.Complainant could not avail the opportunity to cross-examine the witness of OP, so that discriminatory could be elicited from the witness of Ops in cross-examination. Rather evidence of Op’s witness have strengthened the case of Ops.

                Once OPs have succeeded in proving that complainant herself had admitted issuance of cheque for Rs.2.500 lacs and endorsement on the back side of cheque duly signed by her, as such no fault can be attributed to OPs bank, in that event allegation of complainant regarding deficiency in service withers away, being without merit.

              In afore quoted back drop, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of OPs, therefore, complaint fails, accordingly, same is dismissed.However,in the facts and circumstances of the matter parties are left to bear their own costs. File after its due compilation be consigned to records.

Order per President                                              Khalil Choudhary

                                                                         (Distt.& Sessions Judge)

Announced                                                              President

 28-02-2018                                                   District Consumer Forum

Agreed by                                                                Jammu.

 

Ms.Vijay Angral          

Member        

 

Mr.Ghulam Sarwar Chauhan,

Member