| Complaint Case No. CC/230/2020 | | ( Date of Filing : 12 Nov 2020 ) |
| | | | 1. Smt. Aparna Maity | | W/o Sri Gourhari Maity, Vill.- Bagmari, P.O. and P.S.- Nandakumar,PIN-721632. Presently residing under care of her brother: Sri Kartik Manna, P.O. and P.S.- Nandakumar | | Purba Medinipur | | West Bengal |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. The Branch Manager(Tamluk Ghatal Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd.) | | Nandakumar Branch, P.O. and P.S.- Nandakumar, 721632 | | Purba Medinipur | | West Bengal | | 2. Sri Gourhari Maity | | S/o, Late Ratan Chandra Maity, Vill.- Bagmari, P.O. and P.S.- Nandakumar, 721632 | | Purba Medinipur | | West Bengal |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | BY - SRI.SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER - Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Party No.1 is a Banker with whom the Complainant has an existing Bank Account No.603150031407 jointly held with her husband Opposite Party No.2 under the mode of operation Either or Survivor basis.
- The Complainant took a personal loan amounting to Rs.80,000.00 from the “Self Help Group” in the same account and also personally deposited some amount, thus a Total Balance amount as on 30.06.2019 was Rs.1,06,676.32.
- On 24.09.2019, the Complainant went to the Op No.1 for updating the passbook and noticed, the Op No.2 withdrawn Total Rs.1,05,500.00 in three time for Rs.10,000.00 on 30.07.2019, Rs.93,000.00 on 31.07.2019 and Rs.2,500.00 on 06.08.2019 respectively without intimating or obtaining permission from the Complainant.
- The Complainant also states, he has made several written representations by seeking remedy for the illegally withdrawal amount before the Op No.1 and even before the Police Authorities but, they did not pay any heed. Therefore, the Complainant filed the instant case before this Commission.
- The Complainant further submitted a list on 18.04.2022 containing the copies of petition filed before the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purba Medinipur u/s 498(A), 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 causing investigation treating it as FIR u/s 156(3), petition u/s 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1974 against the Op No.2 for their family disputes .
The Complainant, therefore, prays for:- - To pay the illegally withdrawal amount of Rs.1,05,500.00 by OPs with Interest @18% p.a.
- To pay Compensation of Rs.50,000.00 towards gross negligence and deficiency in service.
- To pay Litigation Cost of Rs.5,000.00 to the Complainant for conducting the case.
- Any other reliefs.
- Notices were duly served upon the Op No.1 & 2 but, Ops preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte against them.
- Points for determination are:
- Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?
- Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?
- Decision with reasons
- Both the points I and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.
- We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant along with all papers and other documents.
- Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that there is no dispute that Complainant is a consumer having grievances against the OP No.1, the bundle of facts show that the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.
- In the instance case, the Complainant submitted the copy of Bank Pass Book where the Mode of Operation is clearly mentioned as “Either or Survivor” by the Joint Holder i.e. the Complainant Smt. Aparna Maity and Op No.2 Sri. Gourhari Maity. The account holders are husband and wife. At the time of withdrawal the said relation was subsisting. The complainant wife did not give any intimation to the op-1 about their said strained relation nor she gave any stop payment instruction to the op-1 stating withdrawal of “Either or Survivor”status of operation of account .Therefore, as per the banking rule, the Op No.2 has every right to withdraw any amount from the account independently without obtaining any permission from the Complainant. As per the banking rules, every bank including the Op No.1 has a discretionary power to allow its’ customers to withdraw certain amount by the Withdrawal Slip even they are in possession of the Cheque Book. There is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the ops. in the matter of operation of the account. Hence, this Commission has not found any illegality in withdrawing the amount of Rs.1,05,500.00 by the Op No.2.
- Therefore, the Complainant is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.
- Both the points are decided accordingly
- Thus, the complaint case fails.
Hence, it is O R D E R E D That the CC-230 of 2020 be and the same is dismissed. Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the Complainant free of cost. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties. File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this judgment. | |
