DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD

Dated this the  15^th day of  September, 2023 

Present      :    Sri. Vinay Menon V., President

                   :    Smt. Vidya A., Member                                                          Date of Filing:  29/12/2021 

                                                                                  CC/235/2021

K. Venugopalan,

S/o. Rugmini Amma,

Kavalinkal House, SRK Nagar,

(PO) Ottapalam, Palakkad – 679 103.                   -                     Complainant     

      (By Adv. M/s  T. Kalidas & T.V. Pradheesh)

                                                                                                Vs

1. Manager,

Axis Bank Ltd.,

Ottapalam, Palakkad – 679 101

2. The Managing Director & CEO,

Axis Bank Ltd.,

Thrishul, Opp.Samartheswar Temple,

Near Law Garden, Ellis Bridge,

Ahamedabad,  Gujarat – 380006.                  -                       Opposite parties 

      (O.P.s  by Adv. Ullas Sudhakar)

O R D E R

By  Sri. Vinay Menon V., President  

1. Abridged pleadings are that the complainant a document writer was the holder  of an account in the 1^st OP bank. He had deposited Rs. 40,000/- in the said account on 28/10/2021 out of which he had withdrawn Rs.500/- through ATM.  On 16/11/2021, when the complainant approached the 1^st OP for withdrawing some amounts, he found that the balance amount in the said account was only Rs.8,346.91. Upon availing a statement of account he found that the opposite party had, in violation RBI Regulation and unilaterally debited various amounts under various pretexts. This conduct tantamount to unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. This complaint is filed seeking return of the amounts illegally debited, together with interest and compensation and other incidental reliefs.
2. Opposite parties filed version admitting the facts. They maintained that the said amounts were levied in accordance with the fee tariff under various heads  like fine for non-maintaining the average monthly balance of Rs.25,000/-, home branch cash deposit charges, monthly service charges, debit card annual fee and duplicate statement charges as applicable to the current account maintained by the complainant.  The schedule of charges were explained to the complainant at the time of opening of the aforesaid current account. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the  part of opposite parties and sought for dismissal of the complaint.
3.  Based on the pleadings and counter pleadings, the following issues were framed:

1. Whether the complainant is legally / contractually bound to pay the charges ?
2. Whether the deductions of different charges made by the OP from the complainant’s account is in accordance with the statutory /contractual obligations ?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.s?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to any of the reliefs claimed?
5. Any other reliefs ?

4.         (i)         Complainant filed proof affidavit and marked Ext. A1.   

            (ii)        O.P. filed proof affidavit and marked   Exts. B1 to  B3.   Marking of B1 is objected            to on the ground that it is not attached with Section 65 B certification. Ext.B2 &       B3 are objected to as they are photocopies. Since this Commission is not     bound by Indian Evidence Act and in the absence of any case that the said    documents are  forged, objection is overruled.

Issue No. 1  

5.         The complainant herein is aggrieved by the deduction of around Rs. 30,000/- from his account, which debit, he alleges, is illegal. Pleadings of the complainant are admitted, but the opposite party content that the said debit was in accordance with the terms and conditions governing the maintenance of the current account forming part of the rules and regulations of the  agreement signed by the complainant and the contents of which were acquiesced by the complainant.

6.         In order to substantiate their contention, the opposite parties marked Ext.B2 and Ext.B3.

            (i)         Ext.B2 is the savings and current account form application.  Page 4 of Ext.B2 contains the rules and regulations. Though not fully legible, the said page contains the head ‘fees and charges’. The said clause reads that “fees and charges will be applicable on my account and for other services availed by me as described in the most important document / schedule of charges and on the website www.axisbank........ (illegible) other statutory imposts as applicable from time to time will be levied on all fees”. There are other headings also like change fees, charges, services and interest rates.  The complainant has affixed his signature to the said document.

            (ii)        Ext.B3 is the tariff rates. It shows the monthly free limits and other charges applicable to the account maintained by the complainant. Exts.B1 to B3 were marked without any objection whatsoever by the complainant except that it is a photocopy. They do not challenge the validity, authenticity, applicability or legality of Ext.B1 to B3. They have also not cared to cross examine the authorized officer of OP1 bank to prove their case that the said withdrawals were violative of RBI guidelines.

7.         Thus we find that the opposite party has proved that the complainant is bound to pay charges in accordance with the terms and conditions entered into between the complainant and the opposite parties.

 Issue No. 2

8.         Complainant’s case is that levying of charges was in violation of RBI regulations. The only evidence on the part of the complainant was Ext. A1 which was the statement of account covering 1/1/2021 to 16/11/2021.  In order to substantiate their case, the OPs have produced and marked Ext.B2 & B3 which are the terms and conditions and the schedule of fees and other charges to which no objections were forthcoming.  The complainant has failed to produce any Regulations issued by RBI or Statute which forbade the opposite  party from levying fees or charges as was done herein.

9.         Thus we hold that the complainant has failed to prove that the opposite party had acted in violation of RBI Regulations and that he was not bound to pay the charges as was levied upon him by the opposite parties. 

 Issue Nos. 3, 4 & 5   

10.       Apropos the findings in Issues 1 & 2, we hold that  the complainant has failed to prove any unfair trade practice or illegality or deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.

 11.      Resultantly,  the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought for. 

12.       In the facts and circumstances of the case,  parties are directed to bear their respective costs.

13.       Accordingly, this complaint is dismissed.

                              Pronounced in open court on this the  15^th  day of September,  2023.       

                                                                                                                                  Sd/-

                                                                                                            Vinay Menon V

                                                                President                                                                                                     Sd/-

                                                             Smt. Vidya A.

                                                                 Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant :

Ext.A1 –   True Copy of statement of account from 1/1/2021 to 16/11/2021   

 Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite party:

Ext.B1 – True copy of statement of account from 1/8/2020 to 31/7/2021

Ext.B2 –  Copy of application form

Ext.B3 – True copy of memorandum of fee / charges applicable

 Court Exhibit:  Nil

Third party documents:  Nil

Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil

Witness examined on the side of the opposite party:  Nil

Court Witness: Nil

NB : Parties are directed to take back all extra set of  documents submitted in the proceedings in accordance with Regulation 20(5) of the Consumer Protection (Consumer Commission Procedure) Regulations, 2020 failing which they will be weeded out.