The instant Consumer Complaint Case arises by registering a Consumer Complaint filed by one Deepak Raj Bhandary of Shiv Mandir P.S., Matigara. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant an Indian citizen, a bonafide businessman at Bagdogra and for the purpose of his business he along with his wife opened a savings Bank Account, Axis Bank, Siliguri Branch, Sevoke Road vide bearing No. 914010027219640 since 2014. The Complainant being a regular income tax payee submitted the PAN Card and Aadhar Card with the account as the purpose of KYC and he was using the ATM for the said savings Bank Account. That the Complainant received a prematurity insurance claim value of Rs. 40,32,432.30/- from HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company by virtue of a Judgement of Hon’ble State Consumer Redressal Commission Calcutta in CC No 419 of 2015 by a banker’s cheque which was deposited at Axis Bank, Sevoke Road for clearance through the said SB account of the Complainant and after the clearance of the cheque amount, he transferred a fund of Rs. 5 Lakh on 8^th December 2017 to his business partner Mr. Chinmoy Choudhury for the purpose of his business but the said transaction was failed due to debit frozen as instructed by the Siliguri Branch of Axis Bank. The Complainant then sent a written request letter through email on 10^th December 2017 to the Branch Head of Axis Bank expressed his anguish about the severe financial damage for freezing the said bank account. In response to the said email one Mr. Sanjay Prasad Gupta, AVP and Operation Head of Siliguri Branch sent a counter mail to the Complainant stating with a view to safeguard the interest of the customer through corporate office conducts random checks of transaction of customer’s account. In such a routine check the Complainant’s Bank Account was selected and observed that some of the transactions was inconsistent with general nature of banking transaction in a normal savings account. Hence, as a pecuniary measures operation of savings bank account was declared debit frozen temporary and also it was informed to him in the said email that the Complainant had to be furnished the documentary evidence in support of his sources of credit and then thereafter the Bank would permit normal operation from the said account. On the very date of receiving the said counter email the Complainant sent the attachment of the letter issued by the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company as source of credit. Thereafter, the Axis Bank by another email asked the Complainant to come personally at Axis Bank Siliguri Branch to update the KYC which required for unlocking the freeze account and the Complainant due to his bad health and at that time he was out of station he submitted the re-KYC documents through online. And in the Bank portal it was reflected as KYC updated. On 8^th January 2018 the Nodal Officer of Axis Bank by an email informed the Complainant that due to high value transactions in the Complainant’s Bank Account and the said Bank Account has been marked debit frozen and cannot be lifted by the office only on the basis of email confirmation. Thereafter, the Complainant sent a legal notice through his Ld. Advocate Gautam Basu requesting the Bank to activate the Bank Account within seven days. The further case of the Complainant is that the O.P Bank with malafide intention, intentionally caused debit frozen of the account of the Complainant by applying the unfair means and for that reason there was deficiency of service on the part of the Bank and so the Complainant should be duly compensated. The Complainant by filing this Consumer Complaint has prayed for directing the O.P Bank Nos. 1 to 3 to unlock the debit frozen of his account and activate the Bank Account immediately. And to ask the O.P Nos. 1 to 3 for paying compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- for mental pain and agony and business loss suffered by him, Rs. 3,00,000/- for loss of interest from the period April 2018 and litigation cost.

The Axis Bank has contested the case by filing the W.V through DVP and Branch Head Sudipta Ray and contended inter-alia that the instant Complaint was totally motivated, baseless, false, whimsical and liable to be dismissed. The case of the Opposite Party Bank that in larger interest of his customers. Considering the sensitive nature of Banking transactions and the possibilities of their abuse the Bank regularly makes random scrutiny of its customers accounts. In furtherance of such scrutiny the savings account of the Complainant was selected at random and the transactions in it were tracked. It was observed that some of the transactions in the account were inconsistent with general nature of Banking transactions in a normal savings account. So, as a pecuniary measures in the interest of the Complainant the operations in the aforementioned account of the Complainant was chosen for debit frozen temporarily and thereafter the Complainant was instructed to know the Bank about the sources of credits and the nature of the transaction in the account with documentary evidences. The Complainant was also advised to visit the Axis Bank with persons along with necessary documents including the KYC documents like Aadhar Card, PAN Card, photograph etc, to complete formalities in regard to unlock the account. Thereafter, he was further informed that if he unable to visit Siliguri Branch he may visit at any other branch of Axis Bank through the persons and submit the said documents and in spite of such advise and request the Complainant has failed and neglected to appear before the Bank in person. Thereafter, the Bank Authority also informed the Complainant that if he was unable to appear personally or to any other Bank Branch of the Axis Bank then the men of the Bank would visit his house to collect the said documents. But the Complainant was not agreed over the said proposal and for that reason the Bank was compelled to continue the debit frozen of the said account as because the Complainant never cooperated with the Bank for lifting the debit frozen of the account by furnishing the documents physically and it was not the fault of the Bank but the Complainant himself was liable for the said debit frozen of his account. In this case, the Complainant has produced the supported documents as follows-

1. (Annexure-1) The HDFC letter attached with the cheque in respect of the policy number 13109206. By virtue of the order of Hon’ble S.C.D.R.C., Calcutta.
2. (Annexure-2) The cheque issued by the HDFC Bank.
3. (Annexure-3) Memo of cheque.
4. (Annexure-4) Axis Bank statement.
5. (Annexure-5) Mail correspondents between Complainant and Axis Bank.
6. (Annexure-6) Updatation Report of KYC.
7. (Annexure-7) IT Report of 2017-18.
8. (Annexure-8) Lawyers correspondents with the Bank.
9. (Annexure-9) The copy of Final Order of CC Case No 66 of 2018 of D.C.D.R.F., Siliguri.

In this case, the Complainant Deepak Raj Bhandary, one Chinmoy Chakraborty and Abhijit Das was examined as P.W.1 to P.W.3 respectively. On behalf of Opposite Parties one Sudipta Ray was examined as O.P.W.1 all the witnesses of both sides were cross examined through the process of interrogatories and reply. The case of the Complainant was conducted by Ld. Advocate Mr. G. Basu. The case of the Opposite Parties was conducted through Ld. Advocate A. Ghosh, P. Ghosh, S. Ghosh and P. Raha. The argument of both sides was heard.

The following points are fixed for adjudicating the dispute.

1. Is the Complainant a Consumer under the provisions of C.P Act, 1986?
2. Had there any deficiency of service on the part of the O.P Bank?
3. Is the Complainant is entitled to get relieves as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

Point No 1:- The Opposite Party in their Written Version contended that the Complainant was not a bonafide consumer as per provisions of C.P Act, 1986 and he had no cause of action to institute the Consumer Complaint and the case is bad in law by the principle of waiver, estoppel and acquiescence. On the other hand, the Complainant in his Consumer Complaint mentioned that as a customer of the Axis Bank of Siliguri Branch, he is entitled to get proper service from the Banking Authority but has been deprived the said service in good and proper manner and for that reason to protect the banking interest he has every right to institute the instant Consumer Case as a bonafide and protected consumer under the umbrella of protected amenities enunciated in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

After, hearing both sides nothing contrary is revealed to hold that the Complainant of this case is not a bonafide consumer. So, this point is settled in favour of the Complainant.

Point No 2&3:- The admitted position is that the Complainant opened the said Bank Account with his wife jointly for the purpose of his business since 2014 and he used to hold an ATM Card and all the transactions in this account was held not in cash. The dispute cropped up when the Complainant deposited a cheque for encashment issued by HDFC Standard Life Insurance. Due to such huge amount deposited in the said account the Opposite Party Bank suspected some foul play and for that reason the Bank has chosen to cause debit frozen of the account temporary and when the Complainant intended to transfer Rs. 5,00,000/- from the said account for his business purposes which was stopped. He could gather knowledge that the account was debit frozen and he then and then wanted to know the reason of such debit frozen and ask the Bank Authority to lift the freezing the account but the Bank Authority was reluctant to lift the said freezing of the account. And thereafter mail and counter mail, argument and counter argument was going on between the two parties of this case. The Bank at first asked the Complainant to have a KYC update and thereafter asked the Complainant to come to the Bank physically for unlocking the said account and thereafter the ego fight was started between the Bank Authority and its customers. Now, the matter to be decided at first whether Bank had sufficient reason or not to freeze the Bank Account for a indefinite period. The Bank (O.P) in their Written Version claimed that considering the sensitive nature of banking transactions and the possibilities of the misuse the Bank regularly makes random scrutiny of the Bank Account of its customers. In furtherance of such scrutiny the savings account number of the Complainant was selected at random and the transactions in it were tracked. It was observed that some of the transactions in the account were inconsistent with general nature of banking transactions in a normal savings account. Hence, as a precautionary measure in the interest of the Complainant the operations of the Complainant’s account was chosen for debit frozen temporarily so that no debit transactions in it would be allowed till further notice and thereafter instructed the Complainant to inform the Bank regarding sources of credits and the nature of transactions in the account with documentary evidences. And the Complainant was also advised to visit the Axis Bank, Siliguri Branch in person along with necessary documents including KYC documents and as the Complainant failed and neglected to appear before the Bank Officials in persons the Bank was compelled to continue the said debit frozen for indefinite period. Ld. Advocate of the Axis Bank at the time of argument mentioned that though the Complainant submitted re-KYC online but however he failed to appear before the Bank in person which he was asked. He failed to appear for that reason best known to him. And the Complainant was unable to show any valid reason or explanation for his absence from personal appearance and for that reason the Bank has right to stop the operations of the account and declared it as debit frozen. And no deficiency of service was there on the part of the Bank.

Ld. Advocate of the Complainant countered during course of hearing that the Complainant procured a cheque from HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company to the tune of Rs. 40,32,432,30/- which he deposited in his account for encashment and the said cheque was attached with forwarding letter along with photocopy of Judgement of Hon’ble State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Calcutta in CC Case No 419 of 2015. So, the Bank could have satisfied themselves that the said cheque amount was obtained as an award passed by the Hon’ble West Bengal State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Calcutta in CC Case No 419 of 2015 and this is a valid explanation on the part of the Complainant to show the fund he could accumulate in the said cheque. Ld. Advocate further mentioned that the Complainant sent a written request letter through his registered mail expressed the anguish about the severe financial damage for debit frozen of his account and requested for activation of savings bank account and transfer the fund immediately in response to a cheque he issued on 8^th December, 2016 amounting to Rs. 5,00,000/- for his business partner Mr. Chinmoy Chakraborty but unfortunately the Bank Authority did not accept the request of the Complainant and could not activate of his Bank Account. He, further argued that temporary debit frozen means maximum seven days but here the debit frozen was continued for an indefinite period which is utter illegal on the banking system. The Complainant furnished the re-KYC document and the bank website has updated the same in due course and till then the activation of the account could not be resumed. He, further argued that generally debit frozen process shall be applied to those accounts where PAN or Form 16 is not updated in the account. But here in this case the bank has attached his PAN with the account and the Complainant also submitted the copy of income tax return with re-KYC.

After, hearing both sides and after going through the evidences on record it is found that the Complainant has furnished the re-KYC, Income Tax report and source of fund to justify that he procured the said huge amount cheque in a legal manner by virtue of the order of Hon’ble State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Calcutta and requested the Bank Authority to unlock the debit frozen but Bank all along refused to unlock the said debit frozen account on the ground only that the Complainant never came before the Banking Officials personally. This attitude of a Bank is not acceptable. During the course of hearing of the case the Bank Officials could not show any cogent reason to hold that the Bank was under the instruction of any money regulatory agency was compelled for freezing the debit of the account of the Complainant and when the Complainant time and again has requested the Banking Authority to unlock the account so that he could have make transactions for his business purpose through the said account the Bank has intentionally and unnecessary harassed him. And for that reason, the Bank (O.P) cannot evade the responsibility to compensate a bonafide consumer for the act of deficiency of service on the part of Banking Officials. Therefore, the Commission thinks it fit that due to deficiency of service and utter negligence on the part of the Banking Officials the Complainant as a bonafide consumer is well entitled to get the proper reliefs as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. Thus, these two points are hereby adjudicated in favour of the Complainant. The Complainant case succeeds.

Hence, it’s ordered

That the instant Consumer Complaint filed by Deepak Raj Bhandary against the Chief Executive, Zonal Manager and the Branch Head of Axis Bank Ltd. is hereby allowed on contest without cost.

The Opposite Parties of this case are directed to cause immediate unlocking the debit frozen of the Savings Bank Account of the Complainant bearing No. 914010027219640 within a month and shall credit interest at the rate of 4% Per-annum for the period between the date of debit frozen and unlock date. The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation for causing harassment, mental pain and agony and loss of business of the Complainant within two months from this day. The Opposite Parties are further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost within two months to the Complainant. Any flout of this order on the part of the Opposite Parties shall impose additional interest at the rate of 6% Per-annum over the total awarded money after the due date is over.

Let a copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.