DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 188 of 24.5.2017

                                      Decided on:         7.4.2021

Sumit Bansal aged about 39 years son of Sh.Raj Kumar Bansal, resident of House No.2, Street No.1, Model Road, Nabha, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. The Axis Bank, Shop No.12, Ambedkar Market,Near Improvement Trust, Inside Patiala Gate, Nabha, District Patiala through its Branch Manager.
2. The Axis Bank Ltd., DP Section, 4^th Floor, Gigaplex Building No.1, Plot No.I.T.5, MIDC Airoli Knowledge Park, Airoli Navi Mumbai-400708 through its Branch Manager.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Sh.Y.S.Matta, Member 

ARGUED BY              

                                      Sh.Atul Bansal, counsel for complainant.

                                      Sh.Vaibhav Mangla,counsel for OPs.                                     

 ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. This is the complaint filed by Sumit Bansal  (hereinafter referred to as the complainant) against The Axis Bank  and another (hereinafter referred to as the OP/s) under the Consumer Protection Act,1986(hereinafter referred to as the Act).

Facts of the complaint

2. Briefly the case of the complainant is that has been maintaining saving bank account No.098010100019071 with the OP No.1 since so many years and number of transactions have been made. Moreover he also fulfilled all the terms and conditions  imposed by OP No.1 regarding the opening of new saving bank account. It is averred that the complainant received cheques of dividend amount and he produced the same with the branch of OP No.1 but the amount of dividend could not be credited to the account of the complainant. On enquiry it was found that the account of the complainant has been freezed by OP No.1.It is averred that he had already given written request to the branch office of OP No.1 for changing of address to its original address as per the address mentioned in demat account but the OP No.1 did nothing. He also sent email on 18.10.2016 to the OP but he was shocked to receive the reply that the E mail ID of the complainant was not registered before the office of OPs. Again on 19.10.2016 he received reply regarding non registration of E mail ID and account freeze. It is averred that the account has been freezed without any prior intimation. He also did not receive bank account statement from the OP No.1.The complainant also got served legal notice dated 3.1.2017  and 15.2.2017 upon the OPs but to no response. There is thus clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs which caused mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving direction to the OPs to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. He is also get entitle to continue his saving bank account before the office of OPs alongwith registered e-mail ID.

Reply/Written Statement

3. Upon notice OPs appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply. It is admitted that the complainant is having his saving account. It is submitted that the account opened by the complainant is a salary account and as per the terms and conditions of this account, the salary of account holder is to be routed through his account and in case salary is not routed in the salary account for last three months the account automatically becomes non functional and is credit freezed. In the present case the salary of the complainant was not coming and when his account was checked from July,2015 to September,2015 his account was credit freezed and the said freeze was only in his credit operation only meaning thereby that he can still withdraw the amount from his account. The complainant was called in the bank and was clearly told and explained about the freezing of his account and at present the account of the complainant is in freezed condition, as such no credit entry can be  made in the said account. The address in his saving bank account was changed on 13.4.2015 and the complainant was also provided with the online banking facilities. The complainant can still claim all benefits in his account after switching over to normal account. The complainant is already using net banking on his account. The address of the complainant is changed in both his demat as well as in saving account. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. After denying all other averments made in the complaint, the OPs prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4.  
4. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant, Ex.CA alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C13 and closed the evidence.
5. The ld. counsel for the OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Rajinder Singh, Branch Manager and closed the evidence.
6.  
7. Written arguments on behalf of the complainant have also been filed. We have gone through the same, heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant is having saving bank account with the OPs from so many years and number of transactions have been made on routine basis. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant fulfilled all the terms and conditions imposed by the bank and complainant received cheques regarding dividend .Same were produced by the complainant with the bank but the same were not credited in his account. The ld. counsel further argued that the complainant made written request to the branch officer of the OP No.1 to change the address of the complainant but the same was not done. However, account was freezed. So the complaint be allowed.
9. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the OPs has argued that real facts are that the account is salary account and as per terms of this account in case salary is not routed in the salary account for last three months the account automatically becomes non functional and credit is freezed. The ld. counsel further argued that in this case the salary of the complainant was not coming and account was checked from July 2015 to September, 2015 due to which his account was freezed. The complainant was called and was clearly explained about the freezing of his account. He was also told that the account can again become credit operational if he opts for regular account after giving an authority to the bank.
10. To prove the case, complainant Sumit Bansal has tendered his affidavit,Ex.CA and he has deposed as per his complaint,Exs.C1 toC4 are the various amount sent by various companies to the complainant,Ex.C6 is letter written by  Axis bank to the complainant, whereby he was requested to visit the Axis Bank alongwith one ID proof and to make request for reactivation of the account,Ex.C7 is legal notice,Ex.C10 is also legal notice,Ex.C13 is letter dated 28.10.2017 written to the c complainant by Big share Services Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai.
11. On behalf of OPs Sh.Rajinder Singh Branch Manager has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPA and he has deposed as per the written statement. In para No.3 of the affidavit he has reiterated that the account was salary account and as per terms and conditions of this account the salary is routed through this account but the salary was not coming and the account was automatically freezed.
12. The OPs have placed on file the rules of Axis Bank in which it is mentioned that in the salary account if the salary for three consecutive months then the account shall be treated as normal account. There is document on the file that the complainant went to the Axis Bank and he made request to activate the account on 29.8.2020 and he has tendered all the documents as demanded by the OPs. So it is clear that it was salary account and as per the bank there was no salary for three months and it was to be activated. There is no rebuttal to this fact lead by the complainant and the complainant now has stated that it was not salary account. So now as per the bank the account has been activated. The ld. counsel for the complainant alongwith written arguments has attached various cheques of dividend which have been received by the complainant.Now as the account has been activated so the complainant is at liberty to deposit any cheque of dividend with the OP and same will be credited to the account of complainant subject to clearance but he is not entitled to any amount on account of suffering of harassment as he has himself got activated the account in the year 2020.
13. So due to our above discussion, the bank is directed to receive all the cheques of the dividends from the complainant and be credited into his account subject to clearance. Accordingly the complaint is partly allowed with no order as to costs.  

ANNOUNCED

DATED:7.4.2021         

                                                 Y.S.Matta             Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                                   Member                        President