Per Sri Partha Kumar Basu, Hon’ble Member

The complaint case has been filed u/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against the OP organization which is a Bank under the Public Sector for deficiency in services by means of unfair trade practices.

The gist of the complaint in a consolidated form is that the complainant opened a fixed deposit account no. 13/93 (P1) with OP bank by depositing Rs. 15,000/- for a tenure of 3 years from 02.07.1998 with a maturity value of Rs. 21,077/- when the original FDR no SD 077518 was retained with said bank against loan since paid off in full. The FD was renewed from time to time and a new STDR no. 307450 dated 02.07.2011 for Rs. 46,580/- was issued certificate of which is claimed to have been lost and the banking ombudsman by order no 7 dated 07.08.2012 awarded order for issuance of duplicate certificate by filing indemnity bond. The complainant stated on affidavit in his evidence at Sl (7) and in BNA at Sl (3) that he never had withdrawn the said amount Rs. 93,886/- credited by bank on 16.09.2020 as a proceed of the said maturity amount of fixed deposit account no. 13/93 and he further stated that such proceed of Rs. 93,886/- and Rs. 74,627/- are out of the maturity amounts of different 2 ( two) FDs vide TDR no. 177518 of Rs. 32,000/- matured on 31.07.2007 renewed vide TDR no. 307450 on 31.07.2011 and  vide fixed deposit of Rs. 25,000/- which was credited on 16.09.2020 in the joint account of the complainant and one Ayla Bibi. The complainant further stated in Sl (4) and (5) of the BNA that though he is in receipt of the reply letter dated 17.01.2022 from the bank intimating about receipt of the renewal details of the original FD of Rs. 15,000/- but there is no reflection of the same in the passbook. The complainant also raised points that while the FD was purchased in the name of the complainant himself then crediting the same to his another joint account alongwith another holder is an act of irregularity.

Hence, the complainant filed the instant case for refund of the maturity value of his investment of Rs. 15,000/- with a prayer before this commission for a direction on the OP bank along with a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- and a litigation cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-. In support of his case, the complainant filed Evidence in chief, BNA and also exhibited documents like copy of FDR dated 02.07.1998 (P1) letter to bank dated 25.01.2021 (P2) and dated 16.11.2019 (P3) and copy of GDE dated 23.10.2021 (P4)  for refund of FD matured amount of Rs. 46,580/- maturing on 02.07.2015 and a blank declaration format (P5).

The O.Ps contested the complaint case stating interalia in their Written Version that the amount of original deposits are under contest. The O.P bank has reasoned out that the original invested amount has already been credited along with interest amount in the account of the complainant and withdrawn by him. It is argued by OP Bank that the complainant had no reason to file this case down on legitimate claim or ground. The OP bank further contested the case with rival contentions stating that the STDR number 13/93 dated 02.07.1998 for Rs. 15,000/- was renewed from time to time on 02.07.2001 with a maturity amount of Rs. 21,000/- on 02.07.2004 for Rs. 27,832/- on 02.07.2011 for Rs. 32,000/- on 02.07.2015 for Rs. 46,580/- on 02.07.2019 for Rs. 64,574/- and on 02.07.2019 for Rs. 86,734/-. The OPs further stated in para (11) of the W/V that the matured proceeds of the original FD no. 13/93 dated 02.07.1998 for Rs. 15,000/-  has been credited finally for Rs. 93,986/- on 16.09.2020 after renewal from time to time, being that fixed deposit account no. 11742871756 and transferred to the savings bank account no. 39656547721 on 16.09.2020. The OP bank also stated that under CBSE system the account number got changed twice as per bank master and the proceeds were credited to the account no. 39656547721 on premature basis as requested by the complainant which was communicated to the complainant by the bank by letter dated 17.01.2022 against the query letter dated 29.12.2021 from the complainant.

The final arguments were heard on merit in full on 30.09.2024 advanced by the Ld. Advocates of both sides read with all records and documents and exhibits when BNAs were filed and today is fixed for the Final Order.

From the questionnaire and the reply nothing more in factum got unfolded by either side.

It appears that the crux of the dispute is about the maturity of the three fixed deposits of Rs. 15,000/- of 02.07.1998 in single account Rs. 32,000/- of 31.07.2007 (a/c no. 0129200970500) in joint account and Rs. 25,000/- of 31.07.2007 (a/c no. 01292009705) in joint account. As per exhibits Rs. 93,986/- and Rs. 74,627/- got matured/credited on 02.07.2023 and the complainant did cash withdrawal for Rs. 49,900/- on 22.09.2020 and again Rs. 49,900/- on 23.09.2020 immediately thereafter leaving a residual balance of Rs. 1,57,773/- in the account number 39656547721 which is a joint account.

No photocopy of cheque deposit slip as per annexure A in the W/V as claimed by the OP bank is found on record. No arbitrator award dated 07.08.2012 as referred by both sides is filed by either side. Exhibits in support of the claim of the complainant about fixed deposits of Rs. 32,000/- on 31.07.2007 and Rs. 25,000/- on 31.07.2007 has not been filed/annexed with original complaint or evidence but with BNA only at the stage of final hearing.

There is no conclusive or cogent proof available on record from which the main complaint of non receipt of matured value of FD of Rs.15,000/- gets established. The evidence filed by the Regional manager of the bank branch is available which depicts renewal of the said FD from time to time alongwith account and numbers and it carries evidentiary value. Per contra there is nothing on record by which that could be contradicted by the complainant except negating in a generic manner. Therefore the allegation of the complainant suffers from inherent inconsistencies. Moreover the complainant could not avail the opportunity to cross examine by filing queries in the questionnaire reply part about the outcome of the maturity of the balance two FDs of Rs 25,000/- and Rs.32,000/- and mere enclosing copy of the same at the final stage with BNAs could not fetch adequate justifications from the other sides. It is a cardinal principle that the burden of proof lies with the complainants. The only gap on the part of the bank gets established that the while the original FD no 13/98 dated 02.07.1998 of Rs 15,000/- which was purchased by only Moktar Ali Gazi but the purported maturity value of Rs. 93,986/- got credited on 16.09.2020 in the joint account of Moktar Ali Gazi and Ayla Gazi at the account no 39656547721 which is also the admitted position of the OP bank as per Sl (8) of the Written Version by OP. Thus the bank has failed to exhibit any cogent document at any stage from which it can become apparent as to how the fixed deposit proceeds of one individual could be transferred to any third party account without the account holder’s consent even if either or survivor by operating instruction. We have carefully gone through the records and found no existence of the cheque deposit slip dated 16.09.2020 marked as annexure A in support of the contentions of OP bank. Therefore ingredients of the process as contemplated under RBI guidelines appears to have not been followed by the OP bank which is certainly a deficiency of service on the part of the OP Bank.

Hence the complaint case succeeds in part which is decided on contest against the OPs and in favour of the complainant.

Thus ,  it is

                                                                 ORDERED

That the instant case be and the same is hereby allowed contest against the OPs.

That all the OPs are jointly and/or severally  liable and are directed to make payment of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) only for causing mental agony and harassment to the complainant within 6 weeks from the date of passing of this order.

That all the OPs are jointly and/or severally liable and are directed to pay the litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only within 6 weeks from the date of passing of this order.

That the complainant is at liberty to put the order into execution after the expiry of 6 weeks in case the orders are not complied with by the OPs within 6 weeks from the date of passing of this order.

Let a copy of the certified order be supplied free of cost to the parties as per CPR. 

That the final order will be available in the following website www.confonet.in

Dictated and corrected by me.

   Partha Kumar Basu

          Member