DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

1.     Dev Raj Mahajan, r/o Flat No.9, GD Rail Vihar, S4 MDC,         Panchkula – 134114.

2.     Kamlesh Mahajan, r/o Flat No.9, GD Rail Vihar, S4 MDC         Panchkula – 134114.

…..Complainants

                                V E R S U S

1.     The Chief Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

2.     The Manager/Incharge Global Trust Bank Limited, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh.

……Opposite Parties

CORAM:     SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL                       PRESIDING MEMBER

                 DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA MEMBER 

Argued by:        Complainants in person.

                        Sh.Sumeer Bector, Counsel for OP No.1.

                        OP No.2 already exparte. .

PER RAJINDER SINGH GILL,PRESIDING MEMBER

1.             Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainants had made two FDRs for a sum of Rs.10,000/- each on 14.1.2002 with OP No.2 for 10 years with the maturity value of Rs.26,203/- each. Later on, the OP No.2 merged into the OP No.1 and all the assets and liabilities were taken over by OP No.1. It has been further stated that when the complainants went to OP No.1, after maturity of the amount, on 14.1.2002, they were surprised to know that the OP No.1 had paid only Rs.20,466/- each instead of maturity amount of FDRs i.e. Rs.26,203/- each. Thereafter, the complainants approached the OPs and requested to make the balance payment of the two FDRs, which is amounting to Rs.11,474/-, but OP No.1 flatly refused to make the balance payment. Hence, this complaint.

2.             OP No.1 filed the reply, wherein, it has been admitted that the complainants had made two FDRs of Rs.10,000/- each on 14.1.2002 for 10 years with the OP No.2 bank and, thereafter, OP No.2 merged with OP No.1 and OP No.1 taken over all the assets and liabilities of OP No.2. The complainants received the maturity value of the said FDRs of Rs.20,466/- each instead of Rs.26,203/- each and it has been clarified that this maturity value generate on the basis of interest applicable in OP No.1 bank as these FDRs were made before the merger of OP No.2 in OP No.1. It has been further pleaded that replying OP paid the accurate interest on the said FDRs as per the notification issued by Ministry of Finance dated 13.8.2004 and the OP No.1 also informed all the respective customers of Global Trust Bank Limited vide letter dated 13.9.2004 about the rate of interest. Denying all the material allegations of the complainants and pleading that there has been no deficiency in service on their part and prayer for dismissal of the complaint with costs has been made.  

3.             OP No.2  did not appear despite due service as such it was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 22.08.2012.

4.             Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

5.             We have heard the complainants in person and the learned Counsel for OP No.1 and have also perused the record. 

6.             The complainants have placed on record copy of two FDRs – Annexures C-1 & C-2. From these documents, it is proved that the complainants had made two FDRs for a sum of Rs.10,000/- each on 14.1.2002 with OP No.2 i.e. Global Trust Bank Limited, for a period of 10 years with the maturity value of Rs.26,203/- each. Annexure C-3 & C-4 are the copies of A/c payee cheque issued by OP No.1 for a sum of Rs.20,466/- each. From these documents, it is proved that the OP No.1 had paid only Rs.20,466/- each instead of Rs.26,203/-  each to the complainants after maturity of the FDRs. Annexure C-5 is the copy of letter dated 10.2.2012. From this document, it is proved that the complainants approached OP No.1 regarding the less payment made by OP No.1 to the complainants, which is amounting to Rs.11,474/- only.

7.             On the other hand, the learned Counsel for OP No.1 has placed on record Annexure R-1 i.e. Notification dated 13.8.2004 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division), qua which, it has been mentioned in Chapter III of Sub-para 3, which reads as under :-

“In respect of any interest bearing deposit accounts, the transferee bank shall pay interest at the rate applicable in accordance with the directives of the Reserve Bank of India till the prescribed date. In respect of balances in any current account or any other non-interest bearing account, no interest shall be payable to the account holder. No account holder shall be entitled to claim any compensation for the non-payment of any deposit or other money from his account during the period from the 25^th July, 2004 till the prescribed date.”

It is proved from the record that OP No.2 merged into OP No.1 and OP No.1 takes over all the assets and liabilities of OP No.2.

8.             The learned Counsel for OP No.1 has stated that OP No.1 had already informed the respective customers of Global Trust Bank i.e. OP No.1 vide letter dated 13.9.2004 – Annexure R-2 about the rate of interest. The complainants have placed on record copy of letter dated 10.2.2012 - Annexure C-5, qua which, it has been mentioned that no intimation regarding change of rate of interest was given by OP No.1 to the complainants.

9.             After perusal of the Notification dated 13.8.2004 issued by Ministry of Finance – Annexure R-1 and the letter dated 13.9.2004 – Annexure R-2, we are of the view that there is no doubt that as per said notification, the OP No.2 Bank had merged into OP No.1 bank.   But the OP No.1 has miserably failed to produce on record the proof of delivery of the aforesaid letter dated 13.9.2004 to the complainants either through Registered post or through courier, which, proves that the complainants had never received the letter dated 13.9.2004.  Moreover, the OP No.1 has neither placed any document on record to prove that had they ever published the said letter for the knowledge o general public or complainants nor mentioned in its reply as well as affidavit about any such publication in the daily newspapers to inform the respective customers of OP No. 2 bank about the change of rate of interest.  Thus, the complainants are fully entitled for to get the balance amount of FDRs amounting to Rs.11,474/-, which was wrongly debited by the OP No.1.  Thus, the deficiency on the part of OP No.1 is writ large. 

10.            In view of the above discussion, the complaint is allowed and OP No.1 is directed to pay rest of the amount of two FDRs i.e. Rs.11,474/- to the complainants along with interest @ 9.75% from the date of maturity.  The OP No.1 is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainants as compensation for causing mental agony & harassment and litigation costs. 

11.            This order be complied with by OP No.1 within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, OP No.1 shall be liable to refund the awarded amount i.e. Rs.11,474/- to the complainants along with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of maturity, till its realization, besides Rs.10,000/- as costs of litigation.

12.            The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.