DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA CC.No.332 of 14-07-2011 Decided on 29-09-2011
Bhagwan Dass son of Sh. Amar Nath, Resident of Bhucho Mandi, District Bathinda, aged about 55 years. .......Complainant Versus
State Bank of Patiala, Bhucho Mandi Branch, District Bathinda, through its Branch Manager. State Bank of Patiala, The Mall, Patiala, through its M.D.
......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member Present:- For the Complainant: Sh. Gurpreet Singh, counsel for the complainant For Opposite parties: Sh. Sukhdev Mittal, counsel for opposite parties
ORDER
Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President:-
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is holding saving account bearing No.65052386750 with the opposite party No.1. On 24.06.2009, the complainant has given an amount of Rs.2 Lacs to Mr. Gopal Krishan, the then Branch Manager of the opposite party No.1 for being deposited in his account but the said manager has got deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in his above said saving account and got deposited the remaining amount of Rs.One Lac in the shape of FDR bearing No. CTDR/STDR/808826 in the name of the complainant and the FDR was handed over to the complainant which was issued on 24.06.2009 against maturity date of 06.11.2010. On the date of maturity, the complainant approached the opposite party No.1 for extension/renewal of the FDR and the complainant deposited the said FDR with the opposite party for its renewal but the opposite party No.1 returned the same to him on the pretext that no amount in the above said FDR account has ever been deposited by the complainant. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum, have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that whenever, a person fills up voucher for FD leaf so issued by the Bank, for opening his account and he is allotted account number. As a general practice in banks, amount from the saving bank account is transferred to FD account for which a debit voucher is got signed from the account holder and thereafter, the amount is transferred to FD account. In the present case, the complainant also filled the voucher for FD and debit voucher and his FD account was opened. He deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in his saving account. The FD was to be issued by debiting this amount from his saving account to FD account but due to inadvertence, rush of work and clerical mistake, the amount was not debited from the saving account to the FD account. The opposite parties have further pleaded that when the mistake on the part of the bank, came to the knowledge of the complainant that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- is still lying in his saving account and not transferred to his FD account, he withdrew the amount through ATM on 08.09.2009 to 23.11.2009. The opposite party-Bank is within its right and it is it's prerogative to protect its right and public money as and when the mistake comes to light. The opposite parties have further pleaded that the complainant never paid Rs.2 Lacs. 3. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. 4. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. 5. The complainant has submitted that he had given an amount of Rs.2 Lacs to Mr. Gopal Krishan, the then Branch Manager of the opposite party No.1 for being deposit in his saving bank account bearing No.65052386750 but the said manager has got deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in his above said saving account and got deposited the remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in the shape of FDR bearing No.CTDR/STDR/808826 and the FDR was handed over to the complainant which was issued on 24.06.2009 against maturity date of 06.11.2010. The complainant approached the opposite party No.1 for extension/renewal of the FDR and the complainant had deposited the said FDR with the opposite party No.1 for its renewal but the opposite party No.1 returned the same to him on the pretext that there is no amount in the above said FDR account as such neither the FD can be renewed nor the amount can be released. 6. The opposite parties have submitted that a person fills up voucher for FD leaf so issued by the Bank for opening his account, he is allotted the account number. As a general practice in banks, the amount from the saving bank account is transferred to FD account for which a debit voucher is got signed from the account holder and then the amount is transferred to FD account. The complainant had filled the voucher for FD and debit voucher, then his FD account was opened. The complainant had deposited Rs.1,00,000/- in his saving account. The FD was to be issued by debiting this amount to his saving account to the FD account but due to inadvertence, rush of work and clerical mistake, the amount was not debited from the saving account. When this fact come to the knowledge of the complainant, he withdrew the amount through ATM on 08.09.2009 to 23.11.2009. This mistake came to the knowledge of the bank very late. The complainant had never paid Rs.2 Lacs as alleged by him. 7. A perusal of record placed on file shows that the FDR of Rs.1,00,000/- has been issued to the complainant but the opposite parties have mistakenly failed to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from his account for which the FDR has been issued. A perusal of Ex.R-5 i.e. Statement of Account shows that when the fact came to the knowledge of the complainant that the opposite party No.1 has forgot to withdraw the money from his account for FDR, he has withdrawn the money through ATM on various dates starting from 08.09.2009 to 23.11.2009. The opposite parties have placed on file saving voucher, credit voucher and debit voucher vide Ex.R-2, Ex.R-4 and Ex.R-3 respectively. The opposite party No.1 has forgotten to use the debit voucher. 8. Branch Manager of the opposite party No.1 has specifically mentioned in his letter dated 21.07.2011 Ex.R-6 that due to inadvertence, rush of work and clerical mistake, the amount was not debited in the account of the complainant but the FDR was issued to him. This fact came to the knowledge of the opposite parties when the complainant approached for renewal of the said FDR. During this period, the complainant had never approached the opposite parties for any transaction except from the withdrawal of the money from his account. Now, the complainant wanted to take the benefit of clerical mistake of the opposite parties. He has not produced any evidence on file that he had deposited Rs.2 Lacs. If he had given One Lac in cash for FD to the Branch Manager, he should have produced the receipt of that amount. As per the common practice, if the money had been received in cash, the bank issues its receipt. Thereafter, it issues the FD. If the complainant had given cash for FD why he had signed the debit voucher. This falsify the allegation of the complainant. The complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands. No such person can be allowed to misappropriate the public money on such wrong allegations. Moreover, he had not impleaded the then Branch Manager as a party whom he had handed over the amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. The opposite party No.1 has forgot to use the debit voucher. The clerical mistake on the part of the bank, cannot be termed as deficiency in service. 9. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, the complainant wanted to take benefits of clerical mistake of the opposite party No.1. He has deposited only Rs.1,00,000/- but wanted to take benefit of Rs.2 Lacs on verbal assertion without any evidence that he had deposited Rs.1,00,000/- more. Hence, there is no mistake on the part of the bank. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, this complaint is dismissed without any order as to cost. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. ' Pronounced in open Forum 29-09-2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur) Member |
