BEFORE THE MANDYA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MANDYA PRESENT: 1. SIDDEGOWDA, B.Sc., LLB., President, 2. M.N.MANOHARA, B.A., LLB., Member, 3. A.P.MAHADEVAMMA, B.Sc., LLB., Member, ORDER Complaint No.MDF/C.C.No.51/2009 Order dated this the 12th day of August 2009 COMPLAINANT/S Smt.Nagamma W/o Padma Narasimhaswamy, 4th Cross, Hosahalli, Mandya City. (By Sri.K.V.Sheshadri., Advocate) -Vs- OPPOSITE PARTY/S The Manager, State Bank of Mysore, Mandya Branch, V.V.Road, Mandya. (By Sri.Shivalingaiah., Advocate) Date of complaint 15.05.2009 Date of service of notice to Opposite party 01.06.2009 Date of order 12.08.2009 Total Period 2 Months 11 Days Result The complaint is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs, since the complainant is a poor lady living on maintenance of Rs.900/- granted by the Court. Sri.Siddegowda, President 1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Opposite party for refund of Rs.300/- with interest at 20% and Court costs. 2. The case of the complainant is that she is a customer of the Opposite party Bank having S.B. Account. She used to present the maintenance cheque issued by the Court and drawing the amount. There is no mention in the pass book about the minimum amount to be maintained and so far that matter was not informed and even it is not informed in writing about any circular regarding minimum amount in S.B. Account. Without any notice, from the account of the complainant, the Opposite party has debited Rs.150/- on 30.06.2008 and again on Rs.150/- on 30.09.2008. In this regard, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 24.11.2008 to credit this Rs.300/- along with the notice charges of Rs.500/- and otherwise it amounts to deficiency in service. The Opposite party has sent reply dated 04.12.2008 informing that in the bank premises in 3 languages about the minimum amount to be maintained is published. But in the bank premises there is no such document or any notice. Even otherwise, the complainant is a illiterate customer and at the time of drawing the amount, she was not informed. Further, the complainant has not availed the cheque facility. Without giving any notice in writing, only on the basis of circular of the bank, the deduction of the amount is illegal. On these grounds, the complaint is filed. 3. The Opposite party has filed version, admitting that the complainant is a customer having S.B. Account and used to present the cheque for encashment. At the time of opening the account, the complainant was informed about the rules of the Bank and also about the minimum amount to be maintained in the account and in case of not maintaining the minimum balance, the penalty to be imposed. Further, in this regard to bring to the knowledge of the customers, big notice board in Hindi, English and Kannada are put up. The allegations made by the complainant are false. Proper reply is sent to the complainant. The complainant is bound by the rules of the Bank. Since, the complainant has failed to maintain the minimum amount in her account, two times at the rate of 150/- was deducted and therefore, the Opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service and the Opposite party is not liable to pay any amount or any compensation and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs. 4. During trial, the complainant is examined and she has produced the documents Ex.C.1 & C.2 and Opposite party is examined and Opposite party has filed Ex.R.1 to R.6. 5. We have heard both the sides. 6. Now the points that arise for our considerations are:- 1. Whether the deduction of Rs.150/- each at two times from the S.B. Account of the complainant is illegal? 2. Whether the Opposite party has committed deficiency in service? 3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the relief sought for? 7. Our findings and reasons are as here under:- 8. It is an admitted fact that the complainant is the customer of the Opposite party Bank having S.B. Account No.64024107167 and copy of the pass book Ex.C.1 is produced. It is also admitted fact that on 30.06.2008 Rs.150/- is deducted as minimum balance charges, likewise on 30.09.2008 Rs.150/- is deducted as minimum balance charges. According to the complainant, she was not at all informed about the minimum balance to be maintained and she used to present the maintenance cheque and draw the amount and there is no display of any material about the minimum amount to be maintained in the S.B.Account and therefore, the deduction of Rs.300/- as minimum balance charges is illegal. Of course, the complainant has issued notice Ex.C.2 and the Opposite party has sent reply. The contention of the Opposite party is that as per the Circular of the Reserve Bank of India and Head Office, at the time of opening of the account itself, the customer will be informed the minimum amount to be maintained in the S.B.Account and in fact, the notice board are put up in their bank premises in three languages about the minimum amount to be maintained in the S.B.Account and other accounts. The Opposite party has produced the photos Ex.R.5 and Ex.R.3 General Circular and Ex.R.4 Citizen Charter issued by the Head Office. The Opposite party has also produced Ex.R.6 the details of notice about the charges and the minimum balance, there is no reason to disbelieve these documents. It cannot be accepted that the customer will not be informed about the minimum balance to be maintained and no notice board is put up in the bank premises about the minimum amount maintained in the bank accounts and the charges for other operations. We cannot expect the bank to issue in writing the condition of minimum balance to be maintained in the S.B.Account or other account to all customers. The complainant has admitted that at the time of opening the S.B.Account, she was informed to deposit minimum of Rs.500/- and in fact as per Ex.R.1 application to open the account, the complainant has sought for cheque book facility. The Circular proves that the minimum of Rs.500/- should be maintained in the S.B.Account and in case of lesser minimum amount, the bank is at liberty to deduct Rs.150/- in case of Urban area in respect of S.B.Account with cheque book facility. The contention of the complainant is that the complainant has not at all obtained any cheque book at any time and in that case, the amount is to be deducted at Rs.125/-. But, the contention of the Opposite party is that whether the complainant obtains a cheque or not, when the complainant opted for cheque facility, the computer system deducts the minimum amount. The Opposite party has produced Ex.R.2 account extract, when the complainant has withdrawn Rs.2,600/- on 24.06.2008, the balance was only Rs.201/- and so on 30.06.2008 Rs.150/- towards the minimum balance charges is deducted. Again on 30.09.2008 Rs.150/- towards the minimum balance charges are deducted. 9. Again as per Ex.C.1 and R.2, there was balance of Rs.476/- on 21.07.2008. Thereafter, on 13.08.2008 Rs.1,800/- was deposited, so during that quarter i.e., in between July, August and September, the complainant has not maintained the minimum balance of Rs.500/- for a period of more than 20 days. As per the Ex.R.3 Circular, the service charges for non-maintenance of minimum balance is Rs.150/- per quarter. Accordingly, at the end of the quarter of September 2008, the Opposite party has deducted Rs.150/- as minimum balance charges, these deductions from the account of the complainant are justified in view of the circulars and therefore, the complainant has failed to prove that the deduction of minimum charges is illegal. So, the complainant has failed to prove deficiency in service. Consequently, the complainant is not entitled to the amount claimed. 10. In the result, we proceed to pass the following order; ORDER The complaint is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs, since the complainant is a poor lady living on maintenance of Rs.900/- granted by the Court. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum this the 12th day of August 2009). (PRESIDENT) (MEMBER) (MEMBER)
