The case of the complainant runs as follows :-
That the complainant is an employee of Reliance Telecom Ltd. under Industrial Security Consultants and Services. One salary Account bearing No.020801526191 of ICICI Bank was opened with balance of account nil through Reliance Telecom Ltd. in his behalf. On behalf of Industrial Security and Consultants all on a sudden he noticed that an amount of Rs.1,022/- was debited from his salary A/C as Quarterly Balance Charge (hereinafter referred as QAB).
It is further case of the complainant that due to such deduction from his A/C one cheque bearing No.647983 as issued by him was dishonoured. As a result of which he suffered loss and injury. Due to such dishonour of the cheque the creditor is going to start a proceeding before the court of law. In spite of repeated request the Bank did not assign any reason for such deduction of the amount and or deposit the said amount to his A/C. Hence, this case for refund of the amount to the tune of Rs.1,022/- together with Rs.393/- and compensation.
The OP/ICIDI Bank Ltd. contested the case by filing Written Version denying each and every allegation as made therein. It has been specifically pleaded that there is a salary A/C in the name of the complainant under certain agreed terms and conditions at the time of opening the salary A/C. The employer of the complainant started depositing the salary drawn by the complainant in the said A/C since January, 1997. But after January’08 no salary of the complainant was deposited in the said A/C. Thereby the salary A/C was classified in the category of a normal Savings Bank A/C as per policy of the Bank. The charge as deducted from the A/C of the complainant was fault on the part of the complainant. As per request of the complainant the amount as deducted and the charges as levied were reversed in the A/C of the complainant by the Bank on July’08 and requested the complainant to maintain a Quarterly Average Balance of Rs.5,000/- henceforth. As there was/or no deficiency or Unfair Trade Practice took place the case is liable to be dismissed with cost.
Both the complaint and the Written Version have been filed supported by affidavit.
Upon consideration of the pleadings of the respective parties the following points are to be considered to solve out the dispute involved in the instant case.
Points :
- Is the case maintainable in law ?
- Is there any deficiency of service on the part of the OP No.1 or any Unfair Trade Practice as alleged ?
- Is the complainant entitled to get an award as prayed for ?
Point No.1
This issue has not been pressed by the Ld. Advocates of both the parties at the time of final hearing.
On perusal the materials on record and pleading thereof nothing transpires to say against the maintainability of the case.
Thus, the issue is decided in favour of the complainant.
Point No.2 & 3.
The complainant’s sole contention is that the Account maintained with the OP No.1 is a salary A/C with balance of account nil. Since the OP all on a sudden deducted certain amount of Rs.1,022/- together with charge was deducted from the said Salary A/C he was embarrassed causing pain and sufferings. As because a cheque was issued in favour of his creditor but the same was dishonoured and without assigning any reasoning what so ever such amount was deducted. The case of the complainant was denied by the OP on various pleas including non-depositing of salary in the said A/C.
In the instant case both the parties did not chose to lead evidence giving affidavit-n-chief the case is to be decided on the basis of the pleadings supported by affidavit and the materials on record.
The copy of the notice dated 15.05.08 issued by the complainant to the Branch Manager with a request to arrange remedial action by reversing the deposits in his A/C. There was a threat to take appropriate steps against them. From the said notice it reveals that his A/C failed sort sufficient balance for which a cheque No.647983 got dishonoured and the OP also debited a sum of Rs.393/- towards bouncing charges. The letter of reply dated 01.08.08 issued by the OP to the complainant concerned intimating about the reversal of the QAB charges of Rs.1,022/- on 31.07.08 in his A/C with a request to maintain Quarterly Average Balance of Rs.5,000/- from the Statement of A/C stands in the name of the complainant issued by the OP No.1 for the period from 01.04.08 to 30.09.08. It is evident that the said A/C is a zero (0) balance A/C. A sum of Rs.393/- was deducted towards clearing charges against the cheque bearing No.647983 then the balance amount stands as 1,325/-. Subsequently, the cheque bearing No.647984 for a sum of Rs.1,200/- was deducted there from and then the balance amount stands as Rs.125/-.
Though the complainant took a plea that the cheque as issued in favour of the creditors but the same was not honoured by the OP for which he is apprehended for launching the case against him. Statement of A/C clearly goes to show that the said amount covered by the said cheque bearing No.647984 was honoured. In absence of any
particular of the dishonour of cheque as alleged we are of the view that the said demand of the complainant has not been proved by cogent evidence.
It has been alleged that when Salary A/C maintains in the form of zero (0) balance A/C no service charge quarterly can be deducted.
Admittedly, the A/C stands in the name of the complainant is a zero (0) balance A/C under the head of Salary A/C.
The OP took a specific defence that the complainant was informed severally for maintaining Quarterly Average Balance of Rs.5,000/- but in vain.
Generally, Salary A/C in the form of zero (0) balance A/C system it is to be decided by the employer and the banking authority under certain terms and conditions. The agreement as referred by the OP has not been placed before the Forum for appraisal about the terms and conditions as appended therein. If salary A/C is not maintained by depositing of regular salary, the said A/C would be considered as normal A/C and Quarterly Average Balance is to be maintained and in that occasion the sum of Rs.5,000/- towards quarterly average balance are to be kept in the normal A/C and in case below of the said sum penalty would be imposed by deducting the amount at the bank rate from the balance amount left in the said A/C of the holder concerned. But the said terms and condition is very essential to come to a conclusion that it is within the knowledge of the complainant that if the salary for a considerable period be not deposited in the said salary A/C it would be considered as normal A/C. When any condition be imposed without assigning any reasoning thereof in terms of the Banking Rules and Regulations the bank has no right to deduct any amount from the said A/C. Before imposing any condition it should be brought to the knowledge of the A/C holder and on his acceptance of the said condition that may be imposed otherwise natural justice would be violated. In the instant case a sum of Rs.1,022/- was deducted on 07.04.08. On such deduction notice was sent to the Bank on 15.05.08 and on reply it has been requested by the Bank to maintain Quarterly Average Balance of Rs.5,000/-. But that letter/reply does not assign any reasoning as to why such amount would be maintained in the case of zero (0) balance A/C. Further the terms and condition as alleged in the Written Version was also not mentioned in the said reply. In absence of any terms and condition and any incorporation in the law of reply how it would be construed that it was within the knowledge of the A/C holder for maintaining Quarterly Average Balance of Rs.5,000/-. By issuing this letter/reply it is not clear that terms and condition as imposed within the knowledge of the complainant concerned. Further, it has also not been reflected in that letter/reply that if any salary for a considerable period was not deposited or salary was not withdrawn from the said A/C it would be treated as normal A/C.
It is evident that the amount of Rs.1,022/- was deducted from the said salary A/C. It is further evident from the Statement of A/C furnishing by the OP that no Salary was deposited from the month of February’08. But before imposing such condition deducting certain amount from the Salary A/C it should be informed to the complainant concerned. Therefore, when it has not been intimated and the amount has been deducted suomoto without assigning any reasoning thereof we are of the view that it was latches on the part of the OP and such fault is to be construed as deficiency of service.
The Ld. Advocate on behalf of the OP further advanced argument that at the time of opening zero (o) balance A/C/Salary A/C proper declaration was made that their employer has full right to reverse and instruction given by them to credit in his A/C for any amount within a period of three working days and they will not dispute or hold the bank responsible for any such debit in his A/C. Further terms and condition that it is the responsibility of the declarent to inform ICICI Bank immediately on termination of his employment and they will cease to enjoy any or all benefits under Salary A/Cs scheme. If no credit are made in the A/C specially for the “Salary A/C” for any continuous six months of opening the A/C the ICICI Bank reserves the right to change the status of the Salary A/C to ICICI Bank Savings Account without any intimation to the A/c holder and the terms and conditions as applicable to the ICICI Bank Savings A/C shall apply to those A/C from the date of change of the status.
Such declaration was given by the complainant is also to be proved by production of original form signed by the applicant at the time of opening the said balance. Further whether the complainant is still in service or not the Bank authority could have asked the employer of the complainant as to whether he is still in service with the employer when no salary was deposited in their A/C. Duty castes upon the employer to led the Bank authority about non continuous of the service of the complainant in their concerned as because such agreement was made in between the employers concerned and the ICICI Bank Authority. Further more, when the complainant has filed the instant case for proper relief under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 supported by affidavit it is presumed that his service exists not his employer. Without furnishing any document contrary to the existence of service not his employer such type of argument can not be entertained. More so, it has also not been specifically pleaded in Written Version.
Under the Consumer Protection Act the nature of dispute in between the complainant and the OP and when service was availed of in terms of alleged agreement comes within the purview of Consumer Dispute as provided under Section 2 (1) (e) and when deficiency has already been noticed and held in the light of our reasoning as reflected above it was obviously come within the purview of 2 (1) (g) & (o) of the said Act. At the same time when without any intimation despite having agreement whatsoever the action was taken converting the account in normal savings account amounts to Unfair Trade Practice on the part of the OP and such action also construes as fault on their part.
Under this facts and circumstances, when the amount in question Rs.1,022/- was already reversed the complainant is only entitled to get damage/compensation due to such fault on the part of the OP/ICICI Bank. Complainant is also entitled to get interest @ 9% p.a. on the amount of Rs.1,022/- from the date of deduction i.e. 07.04.08 to the date of reversal of the said amount i.e. up to 31.07.08. The complainant is also entitled to get compensation of Rs.500/- from the OP/ICICI Bank for pain and suffering.
Thus the issues are decided in favour of the complainant in part.
In the result the case succeeds in part.
Hence, it is,
O R D E R E D
that the Consumer Case No.22/S/2008 is allowed on contest in part with cost of Rs.200/-.
The complainant is entitled to get an interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.1,022/- from the date of deduction i.e. 04.07.08 to the date of deposit of the said amount by way of reversal date 31.07.08.
The complainant is further entitled to get a compensation of Rs.500/- towards pain and suffering to be paid within one month from the date hereof.
The OP/ICICI Bank is directed to pay the awarded sum together with compensation and cost within one month from the date hereof failing which the complainant is at liberty to put the awarded sum in execution.
Let Xerox copies of this Judgment and Order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
