The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.P, where O.P is the Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, Vivekananda Marg, Balasore.
1. Factual matrix of the dispute is that the Complainant is holding a Savings Bank account jointly with his elder brother Sri Ajay Kumar Dey bearing Account No.1860612553 corresponding to previous account No.2835, where the Complainant was transacting smoothly till November, 2010. But, due to non-operation, the said account became inoperative. As per request of the Complainant, the above said account converted to an operative one by the O.P, but the O.P did not allow for withdrawal to the Complainant, even after several request made by the Complainant in this regard. Lastly, the Complainant served one legal notice through his Advocate on 20.05.2015 in respect of this aforesaid matter. Thus, the O.P has shown deficiency of service towards the Complainant. Moreover, it is to be mentioned here that the elder brother of the Complainant, who is also a co-account holder in the above said Savings Bank account has been suffering from critical mental diseases and he is very much required for medical treatment as soon as possible under a Specialist doctor. Such type of illegal activities committed by the O.P caused an irreparable loss to the Complainant both from the angle of financial and mental. Prayer for allowing withdrawal from Savings Bank account along with compensation towards mental agony and cost of litigation.
2. Written Version filed by the O.P through his Advocate, where he has denied about maintainability as well as its cause of action. They have further submitted that the above said Savings Bank account, after became operative was to be relegated to the position of initial opening of account, wherein the Complainant and his brother agreed to withdraw the amount jointly from the account. Thus, the O.P-Bank has not allowed to withdraw the amount from the aforesaid account by the Complainant alone is true. The O.P-Bank in reply to the Pleader notice served on the O.P by the Complainant, replied suitably and advising the Complainant to seek an order from the Competent Court of Law to operate the said account by the Complainant only, but the Complainant has not disclosed about the said reply made by the O.P-Bank. Further, it is to be mentioned here as per admission in para-4 of the complaint petition filed by the Complainant that one of the account holder i.e. his brother Ajay Kumar Dey has been suffering from critical mental disease and as per Banking rule, “when a Banker comes to know of his Customer mental illness, all operations of his account be suspended until the receipt of an order of the Competent Court or definite proof of the Customer’s sanity is available”. Accordingly, the O.P-Bank, being one of the nationalized financial institution cannot go or works or can help the Complainant beyond the guidelines. The O.P appeared through his Advocate and filed written version, but he did not take part in hearing as his Advocate remained absent on the date of hearing.
3. In view of the above averments of both the Parties, the points for determinations of this case are as follows:-
((i) Whether this Consumer case is maintainable as per Law.
(ii) Whether there is any cause of action to file this case.
(iii) To what relief the Complainant is entitled for ?
4. In order to substantiate their pleas, the Complainant has filed certain documents, where as the O.P has not filed any documents in his support and did not take part in hearing as mentioned earlier. Perused the same. The original Bank passbook filed in this case revealed that it is an account of Either or Survivor in the name of Ajay Kumar Dey and Bijay Kumar Dey, the Complainant. It has been argued on behalf of the Complainant that though the account already became operative after became in-operative for non-operation, the Bank Authority has not allowed the Complainant to withdraw amount from it. On the other hand, according to the O.P when the Banker comes to know of his Customer mental illness, all operations of his account be suspended until the receipt of an order of the Competent Court or definite proof of the Customer’s sanity is available. According to the General practice and procedure, when a Banker comes to know of his Customer’s lunacy, all operations of his account should be suspended until the receipt of an order of a Court or definite proof of the Customer’s sanity is available. But, the case in hand is different from the above procedure and it is a Joint account with the mode of Either or Survivor. The Complainant is the joint account holder with his elder brother Ajay Kumar Dey, who is suffering from critical mental diseases and money is required for his treatment.
5. So now after hearing the Complainant only and going through all the materials available in the case record, now this Forum found no reason to withhold the account and non-allowing the Complainant to withdraw from it, when it is of Either or Survivor. So in our opinion, it is a fit case to allow the Complainant to operate the account to meet his need for treatment of his ailing brother and for non-allowing the Complainant, he suffered a lot, for which O.P is also liable to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs.1,000/- , which will meet the ends of justice in this case. Hence, Ordered:-
O R D E R
The Consumer case is allowed on contest against the O.P with cost. The O.P is directed to allow the Complainant to withdraw from his account to meet his need for treatment of his ailing brother and to pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- and cost of litigation of Rs.1,000/- to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving of this Order, failing which it will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till realization. The Complainant is also at liberty to realize the same from the O.P as per Law, in case of failure by the O.P to comply the Order.
Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 21st day of June, 2017 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.
