BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.16 of 2017

Date of Instt. 10.01.2017

Date of Decision: 05.06.2018

Manohar Lal Aged about 47 years, S/o Thakur Dass, Resident of Village Kalewal (Lallian) Tehsil and PO Garshankar, Distt. Hoshiarpur. Mobile No.94780-65448.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. State Bank of Patiala, Branch: Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar Through its Manager/Authorized Representative.

2. State Bank of Patiala (Head Office) Nakodar Chowk, Jalandhar Through its Chief Manager/Authorized Representative.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Harvimal Dogra (Member)

Present: Complainant in person.

Sh. YV Rishi, Adv Counsel for OP No.1 and 2.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint is presented by the complainant, wherein stated that the complainant is subscriber of State Bank A/c No.55158750295 with OP No.1. The entire salary amount of the complainant is credited by Employer in the above said account with OP No.1.

2. That on 28.10.2016, the complainant availed personal loan of Rs.2,50,000/-, vide A/c No.65273960953 from OP No.1, which monthly installment was made Rs.6000/- to be deducted from above said salary account of the complainant. At the time of disbursement of loan, the OP No.1 told the complainant that loan amount shall commence to be deducted in monthly installments @ Rs.6000/- from complainant's salary after one month from the date of issuing the loan and no extra amount shall be deducted from complainant's account. The first installment of Rs.6000/- was due on 11.11.2016, which the OP No.1 withdrawn from complainant's salary account on same date and the next installment was to due on 11.12.2016, but the OP No.1 withdrawn extra five installments i.e. Rs.6000 X 5=30,000/- in one month continuously from 11.11.2016 to 16.11.2016.

3. That the next installments @ Rs.6000/- were due on 11.12.2016, 11.01.2017, 11.02.2017, 11.03.2017 and 11.04.2017, but arbitrary and with malafide intention, the OP No.1 withdrawn five installments. When the complainant asked the reason for deduction of continue five installments for the above mentioned dates, the OP No.1 told the complainant due to operation of wrong command, the said five installments in advance have been deducted. The complainant requested the OP No.1 to revert the said withdrawn amount of Rs.30,000/- to above said salary account of complainant, but the OP No.1 told the complainant that once the command is given, the amount withdrawn cannot be reverted, however it can be adjusted in next installments after six months. The complainant neither gave any option, nor consent even nor made any agreement with OP No.1 for withdrawn of above said advance five installments from complainant's salary account in the said month November, 2016, but the OP No.1 deducted the above said installments from salary account of the complainant in one month i.e. November, 2016 continuously with their own accord, which amounts to negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and tantamount to unfair trade practice and whereby the complainant has been deprived off to meet his and his family daily needs, children school books, school fees and suffered a lot of mental tension, harassment and financial loss and accordingly, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund the above said extra five installments amounting to Rs.30,000/- with 12% interest from the date of deduction and further to pay cost of litigation Rs.3300/- and compensation of Rs.60,000/- for mental tension and harassment.

4. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, both the OPs appeared and filed joint reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is neither maintainable in law nor on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine against OP. There is no negligence, deficiency of services or unfair trade practice on the part of the OP as such, the complaint deserves to be dismissed under Section 26 of 'The Consumer Protection Act, 1986.' It is further alleged that the present complaint is false, incorrect and malafide and is nothing but an abuse of the process of the law. The complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and there has been a willful concealment of vital information. The fact is that complainant brought to the knowledge of the OPs about inadvertent error occurred in his account for the first time on 12.01.2017 and his grievance was without any delay was attended to and redressed on 13.01.2017 by making necessary refund of his loan account. The complainant with malafide intention and in pre-planned manner filed the present complaint prior to reporting his grievances to OP and giving it chance to rectify the inadvertent accidental mistake in his account. On merits, the factum in regard to having a salary account and deducting of five advance installment of the loan from the account of the complainant is not in disputed rather these factum has been admitted on the pretext that due to wrong command, the said amount was deducted from the account of the complainant. The other averments made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA and supplementary affidavit Ex.CB along with some documents Mark C-1 and Mark C-2 and closed the evidence.

6. Similarly, counsel for the OPs tendered into evidence affidavit of Parnesh Thakur, Branch Manager as Ex.OP/A alongwith some documents Ex.OP/1 to Ex.OP/6 and closed the evidence.

7. We have heard the complainant in person and counsel for the OP No.1 and 2 and also scanned the file very minutely.

8. From the over all circumstances as discussed in the brief facts of the complaint as well as in the reply, itself reveals that the factum in regard to having salary account bearing No.55158750295 with the bank i.e. OP No.1 and further availing personal loan of Rs.2,50,000/- from OP No.1 and the same is repay by way of monthly installment of Rs.6000/-, is not in dispute rather these facts have been admitted by the OP without any protest.

9. Now, question remains whether as per version of the complainant, the OP has withdrawn five advance installments from the account of the complainant during the period 11.11.2016 to 16.11.2016, though the OP has led these fact by stating that due to wrong command, the said amount was withdrawn from the account of the complainant, but in order to establish that within span of 5 or 6 days, the said amount of Rs.30,000/- was deducted/withdrawn from the account of the complainant, for that purpose, the complainant has brought on the file his own affidavit Ex.CA and supplementary affidavit Ex.CB, whereby reiterated the entire facts as elaborated in the complaint and further to give strength to his oral version, the complainant brought on the file photostat copy of the statement of account of the bank, wherein continuously five entries of Rs.6000/- each have been shown withdrawn from the account of the complainant from 12.11.2016 to 16.11.2016. Though as per version of the OP, the said advance installment amount has been deducted, brought to the notice of the OP by the complainant on 12.01.2017 and immediately on 13.01.2017, the said amount was refunded back to the account of the complainant i.e. after adjusting two installments i.e. for the month of December and January i.e. the remaining amount of Rs.18,000/- was deposited in the account of the complainant, for that purpose, the OP has brought on the file statement account of the complainant i.e. Ex.OP-6, wherein admittedly the said amount of Rs.18,000/- has been shown refunded back in the account of the complainant, but question still remains whether there is a negligence, unfair trade practice on the part of the OP or not, for that purpose our reply is in positive way i.e. there is a negligence and deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of the OP because the OP has withdrawn five advance installments of Rs.6000/- each from the account of the complainant on 11.12.2016, whereas the OPs are entitled to withdraw only one installment of Rs.6000/- on 11.12.2016 and as such, the OP has withdrawn four excess installment amounting to Rs.24,000/- (Fifth one was to be deducted for the said month i.e. December), which is not denied by the OP rather claiming that the said amount was withdrawn due to technical/wrong command, but why the complainant for that act will suffer rather the OPs are liable to face the consequences of that illegal act, which is established by way of documentary evidence as well as from the admission of the OP. So, accordingly, we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled for the relief claimed.

10. In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and the OPs are directed to pay interest @ 12% per annum from 12.11.2016 to 12.01.2017 on the excess amount of Rs.24,000/- (which was already refunded back to the salary account of the complainant) and OPs are further directed to pay compensation for harassment to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within one month from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

11. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Harvimal Dogra Karnail Singh

05.06.2018 Member President