District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.

Consumer Complaint  No. 80/2022.

 Date of Institution:10.02.2022.

Date of Order: 17.04.2023

Kartavya Pandit son of late Shri Pradeaep Sharma, resident of House No. 540, Housing Board Colony, Sector-10, Faridabad, Haryana – 121006.

                                                          …….Complainant……..

                                                Versus

The Manager, Canara Bank (formerly known as Syndicate Bank), Branch Mini Sectt. Sector-12, Faridabad.

                                                                              …Opposite party

Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Now  amended  Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.

BEFORE:            Amit Arora……………..President

Mukesh Sharma…………Member.

Indira Bhadana………….Member.

PRESENT:                   Sh. Joginder Singh , counsel for the complainant.

                             Sh. Ramesh Goel alongiwth Manager of Canara Bank - opposite party.

ORDER:  

                   The facts in brief of the complaint are that being a Govt.

Employee some funds had been issued as compensation by the employer but the same was equally distributed among the complainant and his mother.  The amount which was allocated to complainant was kept in form of different fixed deposit receipt sin Syndicate Bank whose details were as follows:

The mother of complainant went to the opposite party in the month of August 2019 regarding transferring the Fixed Deposit amount mentioned in Sr. No.6 in the above table.  But they informed that complainant was not major till date and they denied to transfer the funds and advised the mother of complainant to come after December 2019 when complainant son Kartavya becomes major.  When the complainant contacted the branch in the month of December 2019 they told the mother complainant that FD would again be converted into fixed deposit for the next one year and asked the mother of  complainant to come in the month of August 2020.  The mother of complainant was constantly in touch with branch head over the phone No. 8130574593. The opposite party assured  the mother of the complainant that fixed deposit amount would be transferred in the month of

August 2020 and there was no loss of interest for the complainant.  When all the fixed deposit accounts matured and funds were transferred in saving account there was a huge gap of Rs.45,537/- in mature value mentioned on fixed deposit receipt sand the amount credited in saving accounts as mentioned above in table.  Besides that the opposite party did not credit the interest    amount of one year i.e September 2019 to August 2020 for the F.D.No.6 which further converted into fixed deposit in the month of August 2019.       When the complainant enquired from the branch bank officials they informed the complainant that the tax had been deducted  from the interest amount.  But when the complainant checked the interest  statement of fixed deposit account,  complainant found that only Rs.37578.44 was deducted as TDS.  Still there was difference of Rs.7958.56 which was not credited in the saving account of the complainant.   Besides this difference, the opposite party also not able to provide the TDS certificate for the deducted amount.  Even the complainant had deposited his PAN number in the branch.      The complainant’s mother was mother and the only earning member of her in her family of two.  The complainant visited the branch six or seven times alongwith his mother and enquired for the illegally deducted TDS amount of Rs.7958.56 and demanded the interest of FDR 6 for the period September 2019 to August 2020.  TDS certificate but every time they made excuses only.  The opposite party did not provide any satisfactory clarification regarding the illegally deducted amount of Rs.7958.56 and demanded the interest of FDR NO.6 for the period September 2019 to August 2020.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   The complainant sent legal notice  dated 01.10.2021 to the opposite party  through registered post but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint.  The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:

a)                credit the amount of Rs.7958.56 which has been illegally deducted the opposite party alongwith date of due till actual realization.

b)                pay interest from the period September 2019 to August 2020 of F.D No. 82394010002573 alongwith further interest from the date of due till its actual realization.

c)                TDS certificate for the amount of Rs.37578.44 which was deducted from fixed deposit.

 d)                pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .

e)                 pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.

2.                Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that  a fixed deposit having account No. 82394170006830 (old account No. 8162) in the name of Master Kartvya M/G. Kiran Sharma for amount of Rs.1,25,000/- was made on 16.08.2007 for a period of 12 years till majority as per court order.  The maturity date of the above mentioned fixed deposit was 16.08.2019 and maturity amount was Rs.3,63,705/- which was subject to provisions of taxation law.  It was pertinent to mention that the PAN card details were not provided by the complainant till 16.08.2019, so that system deducted TDS @ 20% on interest due to not submitting of PAN card as per taxation law and TDS deducted details had already submitted to the complainant so that maturity amount came to Rs.3,01,955.52ps.  Due to the said reason, the opposite party could not issue FORM 16 as PAN Card details were not available.  It was further submitted that the complainant approached the opposite party for redemption of above mentioned F.D, on 20.08.2019 on that date the complainant had not attained majority so the

opposite party further renewed the FD with principal amount of Rs.3,01,955.52Ps. till 02.12.2019.  Even a request letter was received by the opposite party from the complainant.  At that time, the complainant submitted PAN card which was entered into system on 02.12.2019, FD was automatic renewed to safeguard the interest of complainant.   On 21.09.2020 the complainant approached the opposite party for redemption of FD and at that time amount of Rs.3,19,44.24 ps. alongwith interest had already paid to him. Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.

5.                In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–Canara Bank with the prayer to: a)       credit the amount of Rs.7958.56 which has been illegally deducted the opposite party alongwith date of due till actual realization. b)  pay interest from the period September 2019 to August 2020 of F.D No. 82394010002573 alongwith further interest from the date of due till its actual realization. c)TDS certificate for the amount of Rs.37578.44 which was deducted from fixed deposit.  d) pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . e)  pay Rs. 21,000 /-as litigation expenses.

                    To establish his case the complainant  has led in his evidence,  Ex.CW1/A – Kartavya Pandit,, Ex.C-1 – postal receipt, Ex.C-2 – legal notice, Mark- A –FD, mark B -  email dated 16.12.2020, Mark C –  letter ref. No. FRO/P&D/MS/2021 dated 06.01.2021, Mark-D – calculation sheet showing arrival of difference amount of Rs.742.07.

                    On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and opposed.  As per the evidence of the opposite party  Ex.DW/A – affidavit of Anushka Satija, branch Manager, Syndicate bank, Sector-12, Faridabad, Ex.D-1 -  letter ref: 8239/Notice/4012573/01 dated 18.10.2021,  Ex.D-2 (colly) – certificate of interest paid or credited & TDS deduction for the financial year 2009, Ex.D-3 (colly) – comprehensive statement from 01.08.2007 to 10.01.2023.

6.                During the course of arguments, Shri Ramesh Goel Advocate alonwith Manager of Canara Bank,  Sector-12, Faridabad has submitted the calculations of the account  of the complainant vide Annx. X.  As per the account calculations , nothing is balance of the complainant.   The details are as under:

                                                                                                          TDS

2007- 08               1,25,000/-             6,661/-                 1,31,661/-             0

2008-09                1,31,661/-             12,255/-                1,41,465/-   2451/-

2009-10                1,41,465/-             13,168/-               1,52,00/-     2,633/-

2010-11                1,52,000/-             14,148/-                1,63,319/-   2830/-

2011-12                1,63,319/-             15,202/-                1,75,480/-   3040/-

2012-13                1,75,480/-             16,334/-                1,88,547/-   3267/-

2013-14                1,88,547/-             17,550/-                2,02,587/-   3510/-

2014-15                2,02,587/-             18,857/-                2,17,673/-   3771/-

2015-16                2,17,673/-             20,261/-                2,33,882/-   4052/-

2016-17                2,33,882/-             21,770/-                2,51,298/-   4354/-

2017-18                2,51,298/-             23,392/-                2,70,011/-   4678/-

2018-19                2,70,011/-             25,134/-                2,90,117/-   5027/-

04/2019-8/19        2,90,117/-             10,880/-                3,00,997/-  

                                                                   Approx.      3,01,000/-

                                                Aug 2019    |         3 Month 16 days @ 6%

                                                Dec.2019    |                  Rs.3,07,279/-

                                                Dec.2019    |      Rs.3,16,132/- @ 5.75  6 Months

                                                June 20       |

                                                Sep.20                  Rs.3,16,113/-    3 Months

                                                Dec.20                  Net paid = Rs.3,11,945.24

                   On the other hand counsel for the complainant argued at length that the FD was extended from August 2019 to December 2019  and the bank is paying  interest only 6% and from December 2019 to September 2020  bank is paying interest @ 5.75% and in December 2020 net paid amount of Rs.3,11,945.24.

7.                After going through the statement given by the opposite party bank, the Commission is of the opinion that the FD was extended because of non disbursement of TDS certificate  or Form 16 by the opposite party bank.  Opposite party bank has failed to establish their case.  Opposite party bank has not delivered the TDS certificate to the complainant.

8.                          Keeping in view of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that originally the FD was fixed at the rate of 9% vide Mark A and the extended FD was fixed  @ 6% and further  it was extended @ 5.75%.   It was the duty of the bank to deliver the certificate to the complainant.  The complainant also loose refund of the TDS certificate. It shows the deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  This is a  public money we cannot disburse blindly.   In the interest of Justice,  the complaint is disposed off with the direction to opposite party to pay the amount @ 7% instead of 6% or 5.75% for the extended period only.  Opposite party has already paid Rs.3,11,945.24  to the complainant and  pay  the balance amount within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order.  There are no order as to costs.  Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room.

Announced on:  17.04.2023                                             (Amit Arora)

                                                                                             President

                     District Consumer Disputes

           Redressal  Commission, Faridabad.

                                                          (Mukesh Sharma)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                Redressal Commission, Faridabad.

                                                         (Indira Bhadana)

                Member

          District Consumer Disputes

                                                                              Redressal Commission, Faridabad.