Karnataka

Bidar

CC/87/2016

Smt.Jyoti W/o Late. Raju Donagapure - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager SBH Vidyanagar Branch Bidar - Opp.Party(s)

P.M.Deshpande

20 Jun 2017

ORDER

::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

AT BIDAR::

 

 

                                                                                                                 C.C.No. 87/2016

 

                                                                                                  Date of filing : 03/10/2016

 

                                                                                              Date of disposal : 20/06/2017

 

P R E S E N T:-                    (1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata,

                                                                                         B.A., LL.B.,

                                                                                                       President.

    

                                       (2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),

                                                                                 B.A.LL.B.,

                                                                                           Member.

 

                                               

COMPLAINANT/S:      Smt. Jyoti, w/o Late Raju Dongapure,                         

                                    Age: 30 years,  Occ: House hold

                                       R/o Mailoor, Bidar.

            

             

                                    (By Shri. Deshpande P.M., Advocate)

 

                                                      VERSUS

 

OPPONENT/S   :-             The Branch Mnager,

                                       State Bank of Hyderabad,

                                          Branch Vidyanagar, Bidar-585402.

                                    

                                    (   By Shri. R.K. Ganure,  Advocate )

                                                 

                                           

::   J UD G M E N T  : :

 

By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.

 

                    This   complaint   filed by the above said complainant U/s.12 of the C.P.Act., 1986, against the O.P alleging  deficiency in service . The gist of the case is as under:

 

2.      The complainant is resident of Mailoor, Bidar.  The complainant claims that, her deceased husband by name Raju s/o Vithal,   was native of village Harnal, Tq.Bhalki, Dist.Bidar where he was residing after marriage with the complainant.  The husband of the complainant in his life time in August- 2014  had opened an account with the O.P. SBH Bank Vidyanagar branch and the complainant also had filed application for opening the account to avail benefits in the scheme of Pradhan Mantri Jandhan Yojana with Zero balance.   Thereafter the complainant had asked the O.P. Bank to provide the passbook and ATM card.  The O.P. Bank stated the complainant that the passbook and ATM card had been sent to deceased husband of the complainant during his life time.  Thereafter the complainant had  visited the O.P. bank and enquired for pass book and ATM card, but the O.P. had told that the printer was not working and sometimes said that the section officer was on leave and no stock of passbook etc.   Finally the O.P. neither  issued the passbook nor ATM card to the complainant.  Eventually the husband of the complainant died in vehicle accident on 17/03/2015 and the case was registered vide FIR No. 0038 at police station Janwada, Bidar rural circle.

 

3.                Further complainant avers that, If the O.P. had issued the pass book of her deceased husband Raju, they could have regularly transacted with the O.P. bank and could have availed any small scale self employment units upon availing bank loan for livelihood and maintenance.  The complainant being widow to the deceased husband and also legal heir, having her rights to claim the compensation for Rs. 30,000/- against the PMJDY insurance scheme with the O.P. bank of her deceased husband as prescribed in the scheme.  Thereafter the complainant had visited the O.P. Bank on several occasion and applied to the O.P. bank for her legal claim and the O.P. denied  the claim of the complainant and the O.P. did not heed the genuine claim and further denied  the claim on vague reasons by the O.P. bank.  Hence, the complainant is before this Forum.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

4.             After receipt of the Court’s notice the O.P. has appeared before this Forum through it’s  counsels and filed the written versions therein stating that, the entire complaint is based on untrue facts.  Without ascertaining the true facts and without approaching the O.P. bank absolutely the complainant has got no cause of action to file the complaint.  The O.P. bank has not disputed  the opening of the Zero balance account with the O.P. bank bearing account no. 62357877348 under Pradhan Mantri Jandhan Yojna on 26/08/2014 by the complainant.  The passbook for the same has been printed on 28/08/2016 however, the said deceased Raju Dongapure  husband of the complainant had not visited the branch for collecting his passbook which was to be collected against his written acknowledgement. As per bank’s policy the ATM card has to be despatched to the customer’s residential address through speed Post and in this case the ATM card had been despatched by the bank on 27/08/2014 to the customer’s residential address.  Despite this, the complainant has made false allegation that bank has not issued passbook and ATM card, whereas  said Sri. Raju Dongapure had not visited the branch and had not asked for the passbook and hence it was lying with corresponding branch of the bank and the same has been collected by the wife of Sri. Raju against her acknowledgment on dt. 03/02/2016.    

 

5.            The O.P. bank further states that, after the death of her husband, the complainant being legal heir of the deceased, made claim for compensation against PMJDY Insurance Scheme, and she made such claim on 02/01/2016.  The O.P. bank in turn forwarded her claim to LIC, Raichur, which is empowered  to entertain claims pertaining to Prime Minister Jandhan Yojana and accordingly the LIC, Raichur Division by way of National Electronic Funds Transfer (NEFT), credited the policy amount of Rs. 30,000/- to the account of the complainant’s a/c  bearing No. 62357875862 on 22/01/2016,  itself as is evident from the copy of statement of account.  Thus the claim of the complainant is fully satisfied on 22/01/2016 itself, but the complainant without visiting the bank and verifying her account has filed this false complaint.  The complainant even after receiving the compensation of Rs. 30,000/- from the Jandhan account policy towards her claim,  had sent another complaint dated 02/01/2016 which was received by the O.P. bank on 27/01/2016 through registered post, wherein she has asked for compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the bank and also Rs. 2,00,000/- towards compensation under Jandhan Yojana.   In this regard if the husband of the complainant had operated the ATM card within 45 days prior to death of the complainant’s husband, the O.P. bank could have given compensation for Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant by Govt. of India under Jandhan policy.  But, the husband of the complainant though having ATM card and PIN had not operated the ATM card and hence as per policy terms and conditions the complainant is not eligible for compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the said policy.  Since the O.P. had already prepared the passbook as well as despatched the ATM card by post,  no question arises for deficiency of service in the part of the O.P. bank.  Hence, the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

 

6.         Considering the rival contentions of the parties, the following points arise for our consideration:-

 

1. Does the complainant prove that, there has been a deficiency of service in the part of the Opponents?

 

2. What order ?

 

7.           Our answers to the points stated above are as follows:-

 

               1.  In the negative              

                2. As per final orders due to the following:-

 

:: REASONS ::

8. Point No.1:-   The complainant is claiming an insurance amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- attributing deficiency of service in the part of the O.P. bank.  The Pradhan Mantri Jandhan Yojana was a special and unique initiative of the Govt. of India to ameliorate the financial difficulties of scores of poor citizens of the country.  No basic deposit was required to open a Bank account and the account holder was conferred privileges of insurance cover with stipulation.  The Ex.P.7, filed by the complainant at Q.No. 13 and answers of stipulates that, the account holder   operating the A.T.M. card at least once in 45 days would be eligible for accidental death insurance cover.  Here but, the deceased husband of the complainant had never operated the same and met untimely death.  Even then, acting procedurally, the O.P. bank has caused a sum of Rs.30,000/- to be credited to the account from L.I.C. by N.E.F.T. as is revealed form Ex.R.3.

 

9.                 The complainant in an imaginative way has claimed that, her husband ( late) and she could have started business enterprises etc.  which is nothing but speculative in nature.

 

10.                 Perusing the documents produced and averments of the parties, we are convinced that, there is no deficiency of service and holding point No. 1 accordingly, proceed to pass the following.

   

:: ORDER ::

 

   

1. The complaint is dismissed as not due.
2. There would be no order towards costs or otherwise.

( Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 20^th   day of  June-2017 )

 

 

 

   Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

Member.                                                                President.                                                                                            

 

Documents produced by the complainant

1. Ex.P.1- Copy of representation of the complainant to the Managing Director of O.P. bank dt. 20/09/2015.
2. Ex.P.2- Copy of death certificate of late Raju.
3. Ex.P.3- Copy of further representation to O.P. bank                        dt. 02/01/2016.
4. Ex.P.4- Original rebuttal letter of O.P. dt. 09/02/2016.
5. Ex.P.5- Copy of pass book.
6. Ex.P.6- Copy of F.I.R. in Cr.No.38/2015 of Janawada P.S.
7. Ex.P.7- Copy of description of Jandhan Yojana.

 

 Document produced by the Opponent.

 

1. Ex.R.1-  Copy of Pass book ( Replica of Ex.P.5 )
2. Ex.R.2- Copy of O.P’s letter to L.I.C.
3. Ex.R.3- Account statement copy.

 

 

Sri. Shankrappa H.                                             Sri. Jagannath Prasad                                  

       Member.                                                                      President.

 

 

mv.