ADV. RAVI SUSHA, MEMBER. Complaint for a direction to the opp.party to repay the amount of Rs.14,309/- , compensation and cost. The averments in the complaint can be briefly summarized as follows: The complainant is an account holder of the opp.party bank vide current A/c.No.506011005046 At the time of opening the account nothing was stated by the opp.party towards the complainant with regard to the service fee with service tax and other hidden service charges. The complainant received a state of deposit accounts dt. 22.5.06 from the opp.party. In that statement of accounts some discrepancies were noted ie. On 1.9.05 a sum of Rs.921/- was withdrawn by the opp.party towards commission for collecting cheque CBI, Anchalumoodu, and on 27.3.06opp.party had withdrawn a sum of Rs.3,279/- towards service fee with service tax @ 10.20% . Thereafter the complainant had received another summary of account dt. 1.6.06 issued by the opp.party stating that Rs.1,129/- was withdrawn from the complainant’s account as unrecovered charges for previous quarters. After receiving the statement of accounts complainant brought the matter before the opp.party and requested to revise those entries which were unauthorisedly withdrawn from the complainants’ account. The claim of the complainant opp.party credited a sum of Rs.4,408/- in the account on 1.6.06as service charges reversed. The complainant has again received statement of accounts dt. 3.7.06 and 4.10.06 from the opp.party. The complainant had noted that opp.party has again withdrawn Rs.4,490/- on 26.6.06 and Rs.4,490/- on25.9.06 as service fee with service tax @ 12.24% . On 9.10.2006 the complainant sent a lawyer notice to the opp.party. Opp.party accepted the notice on 10.10.2006 but they have neither sent any reply nor to furnish any details justifying their acts. The complainant was surprised to receive another statement of deposit account dt. 3.1.2007 from the o9pp.party stating that Rs.4.490/- was withdrawn from the complainant’s account on31.12.2006 as service fee with service tax @ 12.24%. The act of the opp.party amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.. Hence the complaint. The opp.party filed version contending, interalia, that the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The complainant has approached this Forum with unclean hands by suppressing the material facts regarding the case. The complainant is the proprietor of M/s. Sabeena Stores have opened an orange current . vide A/c. No.506011005046. As per the terms of the said current account the account holder is bound to maintain a minimum quarterly average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- is his account. The complainant in fact opened the orange current account with the opp.party after fully knowing about the requirement of maintaining a minimum quarterly balance of Rs.1,00,000/- in his account and also about the service charge of Rs.4,000/- and service tax payable to the Government in the event of failure to maintain quarterly average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- in the account. But thereafter he failed to maintain a quarterly average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- in his account and thereby violated the terms of the orange current account with this opp.party. Due to the failure on the part of the complainant in maintaining the minimum quarterly average balance in his account the opp.party made a debit of Rs.3,279/- andRs.1,129/- on 27.3.06 and 23.5.2006 respectively towards the service charge payable to the opp.party including the service tax applicable. The complainant thereafter made a request to this opp.party to avoid the service charges already collected from his account and the above request was favourably considered by the opp.party keeping the good relationship between the complainant and this opp.party. The complainant despite of the warning given by the opp.party had deliberately failed to maintain the quarterly average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- in his orange current account for the 2nd,3rd and fourth quarter in the year 2006. Accordingly the opp.party debited an amount of Rs.4,490/- each from the current orange account of the complainant on 26.6.2006, 25.9.2006 and 31.12.2006 respectively. So the continues failure on the part of the complainant in maintaining the quarterly average balance in his account is a deliberate and willful action in violation to the terms and conditions of the orange current account with this opp.party. The complainant is not entitled to claim any relief against this opp.party as claimed in the complaint. Hence the opp.party prays to dismiss the complaint. Points that would arise for consideration are: 1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opp.party 2. Reliefs and costs. For the complainant PW.1 is examined. Ext. P1 to P8 are marked. For the opp.party DW.1 is examined. Ext. D1 to D5 are marked. POINTS : According to the complainant the withdrawal of Rs.4490/- on26.6.06 and Rs.4490/- on 25.9.06 made by the opp.party as service fee with service tax is unfair. The opp.party is not entitled to charge any such fee or tax. But opp.party’s contention is that the complainant had opened an orange current account with the opp.party and as per the terms and condition for getting facilities of the said account, the account holder is bound to maintain a quarterly average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- in his account failing the bank is entitled to realize the service charges of Rs.4000/- per fquarter with applicable service taxes. Here the question to be considered is whether opp.party has committed any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice to the complainant. Complainant’s contention is that at the time of opening the account nothing was stated by the opp.party towards the complainant with regard to the service fee with service tax and other hidden services charges. Opp.party’s version is that the complainant was made aware of the salient features of the above account by the opp.party at the time of joining the orange current account and the complainant had initially deposited an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- while opening the account on26.10.2004 and thereafter he was regularly maintaining the quarterly minimum average balance of Rs.1,00,000/- till the last quarter of 2005. After that the complainant failed to maintain quarterly average balance in his account. Hence during the last quarter of 2005 the opp.party made a debit of Rs.3279/- and Rs.1129/- on 27.3.2006 and 23.5.2006 respectively towards service charges Rs.4000/- and service tax applicable. On request of the complainant considering the relationship with the customer the opp.party deducted the said account and credited to the account of the complainant. According to the opp.party at that time also the opp.party informed to the complainant about the requirements of maintaining the minimum quarterly average balance infuture. During cross examination of the complainant he has deposed that mj gn\mk\ debit dxkA rmf\fjufk\ annual quarterly average maintain svu\ulf\ffksdln\mlsnr\rkA future H Tfk\ strict Lluj comply svu\unsar\rkA >lb\d\ LliCUe\se}j}lnr\Srh\Sh[Q] rh\h gJfjujH Seldnsar\rk\ LliCUe\se}k. From the said evidence if can be seen that the complainant was fully aware of maintaining the minimum quarterly average balance in his account. According to the complainant opp.party had acted against the banking rules. But opp.party produced Ext. D2 document in which it is specifically stated that the quarterly average balance requirements for orange current account is Rs.1,00,000/- and the salient featureand specific condition of the said account. Opp.party contended that Ext. D2 was given to the complainant at the account opening time. More over the complainant had joined the said account after signing Ext. D1opening Form. In that document also the complainant agreed to maintain sufficient and minimum balance as prescribed by the opp.party from time to time. Hence from the whole evidence we are of the view that the deductions made by the opp.party for Rs.4490/- on 26.6.06 and Rs.4490/- on 25.9.06 and Rs.4490/- on 31.12.2006 as service fee with service tax@ 12.24% are in accordance with the terms and condition of the accounts. There is no deficiency in service on the side of opp.party. In the result the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed without cost. Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2010. : I N D E X List of witnesses for the complainant
PW.1. - Shajahan List of documents for the complainant P1. – Statement of accounts P2.- Statement of accounts from 1.5.06 to 31.5.2006 P3. – Statement of accounts 1.6.06to 30.6.06 P4. – Statements of accounts 1.9.06 to 30.9.06 P5. – Advocate notice P6. – postal receipt P7. – Acknowledgement card P8. – Statements of accounts 1.12.06 to 3.1.2007 List of witnesses for the opposite party DW.1. – K.G. Venu List of documents for the opp.party D1. – Copy of current account opening Form D2. – Phamlet D3. – Copy of bank account D4. – Receipt D5. – Letter sent by State Bank of India to the Branch Manager, Ing Vysya Bank | 
