Date of Filing:28/02/2011

        Date of Order:20/04/2011

BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE -  20

Dated:  20^th DAY OF APRIL 2011

PRESENT

SRI.H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO,B.SC.,B.L., PRESIDENT

SRI.KESHAV RAO PATIL, B.COM., M.A., LL.B., PGDPR, MEMBER

SMT.NIVEDITHA .J, B.SC.,LLB., MEMBER

COMPLAINT NO.420 OF 2011

Mr. Srikant B’Walwadkar,

Sahayadri School,

KF1, Tiwai Hill,

Taluqua: Rajgurunagar,

Pune-410513.

….  Complainant.

V/s

(1)  The Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,

State Bank Bhavan, 4^th Floor,

Nariman Point,

Mumbai-400 021.

(2) State Bank Of India,

NAL Bangalore,

Post Box No.1792,

Khodihalli, Vimanpura,

Bangalore-560 017.

…. Opposite Parties

BY SRI. H.V.RAMACHANDRA RAO, PRESIDENT

-: ORDER:-

The brief antecedents that lead to the filing of the complainant U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking direction to the Opposite Party to pay Rs.1,45,263/- are necessary:-

2.       The PPO for Rs.28,35,136/- was received by the opposite party No.2 on 21.05.2010 with respect to the pension of the complainant but no amount was credited to the complainant’s account.  On 16.06.2010 the wife of the complainant went to the opposite party No.2 and gave a complaint stating that the amount is not received.  On 19.06.2010 again the wife of the complainant went to the opposite party No.2 and lodged a complaint regarding non-receipt of the money.  As the amount was not received, the complainant lodged a written complaint through e-mail on 20.07.2010.  On 06.09.2010 the opposite party No.2 has stated that it has credited Rs.8,462/- to the account of the complainant.  When the complainant sought clarification, on 09.09.2010 the opposite party No.2 has stated that they have calculated at the rate of 3.5% pa for the delayed payment.  The opposite party received the amount of Rs.28,35,136/- on 21.05.2010, but they have credited Rs.1,94,981/- on 28.06.2010 and Rs.8,85,755/- on 08.07.2010.  As per their letter dated: 10.09.2010 there is delay in depositing the money, but they have credited only a marginal interest at 3.5%.  Hence they have to pay interest at the rate of 9% amounting to Rs.21,263/-, Rs.80,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.40,000/- towards cost of the litigation and also interest at the rate of 18% pa.

2.      In brief the version of the opposite parties are:-

          The opposite parties have not received the amount of Rs.28,35,136/- on 21.05.2010, but only PPO has been received.  On 16.06.2010 no complaint has been given, but on 19.06.2010 a complaint has been given by the complainant.  The complaint of 20.07.2010 and the reply of the opposite party on 09.09.2010 are admitted i.e., crediting Rs.8,462/- as interest to the SB account of the complainant.  The complainant himself admits that the amount of Rs.19,49,381/- was credited to his account on 28.06.2010 and Rs.8,85,755/- was received on 08.07.2010.  Since the completion of the formalities and payment in pursuance of PPO order takes 10 days in normal course, thus there is delay in only about 25 days in respect of the first payment and 35 days in respect of the 2^nd payment.  The interest on FD kept for 15 to 45 days is 2.5% pa and 3.5% pa for 45 days to 90 days as per the circular of the RBI.  Hence the opposite parties have given 3.5% which is just and proper.  The opposite party has received notice, which has been forwarded on the opposite party No.2 and the opposite party No.2 has paid the interest which is just and proper.  All the allegations to the contrary are denied.

3.      To substantiate their respective cases the complainant has filed a Memo stating that the complainant and the documents be read as his evidence.  Whereas the opposite party has filed his affidavit.  Hence the arguments were heard.

4.       The points that arise for our consideration are:-

:- POINTS:-

1. Whether the action of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service?

2. What Order?

5.       Our findings are:-

Point (A)    :        In the Positive

Point (B)    :        As per the final Order

                             for the following:- 

-:REASONS:-

Point A & B:-

6.       Reading the pleadings in conjunction of the evidence on record it is an admitted fact that the complainant is a retired employee and he has his account with the opposite parties and his pension has to be encashed and paid by the opposite parties.  It is also an admitted fact that on 21.05.2010 PPO has been received by the opposite parties for Rs.28,35,136/- and that amount was not paid to the complainant immediately.  Out of that Rs.19,49,381/- was credited to the account of the complainant on 28.06.2010 and Rs.85,735/- was credited to his account on 08.07.2010.  There is delay in crediting the amount i.e., 45 days and 35 days respectively.

7.       But the opposite parties have contended that normally it is 10 days to credit the amount.  Why it takes 10 day? There is no answer.  When the amount has been received, the PPO itself has been received, it is as good as cash and they have to credit the amount to the account of the pension holder.  That has not been done.  Hence there is deficiency in service.

8.       Here the opposite parties credited interest for the delay at the rate of 3.5% amounting to Rs.8,462/-, whereby it has admitted its lapses, its letherginess, its unfair trade practice.  By merely paying interest at the rate of 3.5% pa, it does not mean they are absolved of the liability for paying damages.

9.       Here the complainant has not been given his pension immediately.  He has been put to suffering for 45 days.  The pensioner knows, what is the value of the money?  If he does not get his money within the stipulated period he will have to loss his life.  It will put more mental agony to him.  Even after committing delay in paying the amount it paid the meager amount of Rs.8,462/- taking some guidelines of the RBI regarding fixed deposits.

10.     Here if the amount has been released to the complainant he could have invested it in many other things, either in the land or otherwise in any other real estate, as such the complainant would have received more money.  Hence under these circumstances as the opposite parties have committed delay in paying the amount to the complainant if we order the opposite party to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation to the complainant and another sum of Rs.5,000/- as damages to the complainant we think it will meet the ends of justice.  Hence we hold the above points accordingly and proceed to pass the following:-

-: ORDER:-

1. The Complaint is Allowed-in-part.
2. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order, together with Rs.2,000/- as costs of this litigation to the complainant. 
3. The opposite parties are directed to send the amount to the complainant through DD by registered post acknowledgment due and submit the compliance report to this Forum with necessary documents within 45 days from the date of this order.

4. Return the extra sets filed by the parties to the concerned as under Regulation 20(3) of the Consumer’s Protection Regulation 2005.

5.       Send a copy of this order to both parties free of costs, immediately.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 20^th Day of April 2011)

MEMBER                                  MEMBER                        PRESIDENT