O R D E R
R.Vijayakumar, Member
The complaint is filed for getting Rs.48796/- along with interest at the rate of 13%, compensation Rs.10000/- and cost.
The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows.
The complainant’s husband K.Baburajan had started account in the opposite party’s bank on 23/03/91. After the death of her husband on 04/12/94, deposits were continuing. The matured amount in Fixed Deposits were re-deposited in the same bank itself. Total amount of deposits in three accounts Rs.72500/- was re-deposited in fixed deposit in 1996 for an interest at the rate of 12 ½ %.
(2)
It was increased to Rs.88000 in the year 1999. Due to the Income Tax problem and as per the direction of bank officers, that amount was divided into two Daily increasing deposits. It was deposited for 63 months for an interest at the rate of 11 ½ %. The due date was 04/03/05. Each deposit was to be doubled to Rs.88000/-.The complainant wished to deposit Rs.1,50,000/-in the ‘Nithyavardhana Deposit’ and to spare Rs.26000/-. For this purpose, the receipts were handed over to the bank clerk namely Radhakrishna pillai. After some time, the said Radhakrishna Pillai informed the complainant that account will mature only on 03/04/05 and he handed over the receipt to the complainant. On 07/04/05 the complainant again came to the opposite party bank and demanded for the deposit of Rs.50000/- each in three daily increasing account and to deposit the balance amount in the savings account. But the said Radhakrishna Pillai had deposited only Rs.100000/- in one account. On enquiry he had replied that the complainant is entitled to get only Rs.1,27,204/-. The balance amount was deposited in the savings account of the complainant. The receipts which were handed over by the complainant was exchanged by Radhakrishna Pillai. When the complainant questioned the irregularities and the act done by Radhakrishna Pillai, he had replied that Rs.127000/- is the matured amount of Rs.20000/- which was deposited by the complainant’s husband on 03/10/91 and renewed periodically. The answer in fact was quite lie.
Rs.44000/- each were deposited the two Nithya Vardhana deposits for a period of 63 months. The interest rate was 11 ½ %. The actual maturity amount was Rs.88000/- each. But instead of giving Rs.176000/- the bank had allowed only Rs.127204/-. The complainant sustained a loss of Rs.48,796/-. There is deficiency in service from the part of opposite party. Hence the complaint.
The opposite party filed version contenting the allegations of the complainant.
(3)
On 25/01/02 the complainant had made two deposits in the opposite party’s bank for an amount of Rs.44000/- each for which the maturity date was 03/04/05 and maturity amount was Rs.63602/- receipts for these deposits were issued to the complainant. ON 03/04/05 itself Rs.100000/- was deposited in Nithya Vardhana deposit from the total amount of Rs.127204/-account for which interest rate was 8%. The maturity date was 03/04/07 and the maturiy amount was Rs.1,17,170/-. Receipt for this amount also was issued to the complainant. The balance amount Rs.27000/- was credited to the complainant’s SB A/c.No.14565.
The complainant had not deposited Rs.88000/- in the year 1999. The Bank is not liable to give interest for non-deposited amount. The complainant made complaints before the opposite party’s bank President, RBI and Co-operative Registrar. All these authorities dismissed the complaints finding that there is no merit in her complaint. The complaint is intended to harass the opposite parties and it is only experimental. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
The complainant filed affidavit.
PW1 examined. Exts.P1 to P5 marked.
From the side of opposite parties, DW1 examined. Exts.D1 to
D8 marked.
Heard both sides.
The points that would arise for consideration are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency in service from the part of opposite party?
2. Compensation and cost.
(4)
Points (1) and (2)
Admittedly the complainant’s husband Baburajan was an account holder in opposite party Bank from 1991 and he has deposited Rs.20000/- in the year 1991 under ‘Nithyavardhana Deposit scheme. After the death of Baburajan as the nominee that account was came under the control of the complainant and the matured amounts were re-deposited in the same bank under the same scheme for various periods.
According to the complainant she had attained a total amount of Rs.72500/- in the year 1996 and it was deposited again in fixed deposit for an interest at the rate of 12 ½ %. In the year 1999 this amount was increased to Rs.88000/-. As the bank authorities pointed out the income tax problem this amount was divided into two and deposited in two accounts under “Nithyavardhana scheme deposit for 63 months. The matured amount in each deposit as per the scheme was Rs.88000/- and maturity date was 04/03/05.
According to the opposite parties, the complainant’s husband had deposited Rs.20000/- for an interest at the rate of 13.5% in the year 1991.The maturity value was 38810. Period of maturity was 5 years. From this matured amount Rs.38000/- was again deposited in the bank for the period of 63 months. The interest rate was 16% per annum. In the year 2002, the maturity year of this ‘ Nithyavardhana deposit amount including interest was increased to Rs.88416/-. From this amount Rs.44000/- each was deposited in two ‘ Nithyavardhana’ Deposits for a period of 39 months. The interest rate for the deposit was 11.5%. The maturity value of the deposit was Rs.63602/- and the maturity date was 03/04/05. The complainant had misunderstood that the maturity value was double of the deposited amount. No such scheme was prevailing at that time. The previous scheme of doubling deposit was stopped as per direction of RBI.
(5)
The main points to be determined in this case are that when the complainant had deposited 44000/- each in two ‘Nithyavardhana’ deposits and what was the period of maturity? According to the complainant she had deposited Rs.44000/- each in two ‘ Nithyavardhana deposits in the year 1999 for a period of 63 months. The interest rate was 11 ½ %.
We have perused the documents in detail. No document was produced by the complainant to show that she had made two deposits for Rs.44000/- each in the year 1999. On the otherhand, Exts.D5 and D6, produced by the opposite parties to prove their contentions clearly shows that the complainant had deposited Rs.44000/- each on 03/01/02 in two ‘Nithyavardhana deposits’ for the period of 39 months. The maturity value payable as per D5 and D6 were Rs.63602/- each. Ext.D8 clearly shows that the previous deposit was made by the complainant on 03/10/96 for an amount of Rs.38800/-. The maturity period of this deposit was 63 months and maturity value was 88416/-. Ext.D1 copy of the ledger shows that the complainant’s husband Baburajan had deposited an amount of Rs.20000/-on 03/10/91. The maturity period was 60 months and the maturity value was Rs.38810/- the maturity date was 03/10/96. Ext.P1 Pass book produced by the complainant also shows that balance of two deposits Rs.416/- was credited to Ext.P1 on 25/01/02 the date on which the deposit was started as per Ext.P3.
Hence the complainant failed to prove the contentions raised in the complaint. The evidence adduced by the opposite parties stands unimpeached.
The opposite parties had pointed out in their version that petitions were submitted by the complainant before the authorities of RBI, and the Human Rights Commission several times and the petitions were disposed after enquiries and finding that there is no merits in the petitions regarding these bank deposits. It was also admitted by PW1 in her deposition.
(6)
Considering all these circumstances and after detailed perusal of all the documents produced by both sides we came to the conclusion that the complaint is baseless and it is based only upon speculations and misunderstanding. Hence we find that there is no deficiency in service from the part of opposite party.
In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dated this the 28th day of February 2011.
Adv.Ravi Susha :Sd/-
R.Vijayakumar :Sd/-
INDEX
List of witnesses for the complainant
PW1 - Thankachi
List of documents for the complainant
P1 - Pass book
P2 - Receipt dtd: 28/12/04
P3 - Second receipt dtd: 28/12/04
P4 - Receipt dtd: 26/05/06
P5 - Deposit receipt dtd: 07/04/05
List of witnesses for the opposite party
DW1 - Radhakrishana Pillai
List of documents for the opposite party
D1 - Deposit Register
D2 - Certified ledger copy
D3 - Copy of deposit register
D4 - Certified copy of ‘Nithyavardhana deposit’
D5 - Nithyavardhana deposit’ receipt no.A 1460
(Deposit receipt for L 577 dtd: 25/01/2002)
D6 - Fixed deposit receipt for A 1460
D7 - ‘Nithyavardhana deposit dtd: 25/11/96
D8 - Certified copy of Nithyavardhana deposit
// Forwarded by Order //
Senior Superintendent
