DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD
Dated this the 30th day of May 2018
Present : Smt.Shiny.P.R. President
: Smt.Suma.K.P. Member Date of filing: 01/02/2018
: Sri.V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
(C.C.No.19/2018)
Akshayababu,
D/o Suresh,
House No.58/12 B, 1st Street,
K.K.Road, Kanthaswamy Layout,
Vizhupuram District,
Tamilnadu. - Complainant
(By Adv.K.Balachandran)
V/s
The Secretary,
Vilaynchathanur Service Co-operative Bank,
Vilayanchathanur, Palakkad.
(Rep. in person) - Opposite parties
O R D E R
By Sri. V.P.Anantha Narayanan, Member
The case of the complainant is stated briefly as follows.
In the name of the complainant and her grandmother Rs.1,00,000/- was deposited on 17.06.2008, whose maturity value was Rs.2,00,000/- on 16.06.2017 and the name of this deposit is “Swayamvardini” for which fixed deposit receipt No:380 was also given which was kept by grandmother Thayuamma. The fixed deposit was jointly opened in the names of the complainant and her grandmother, named Thayuamma on either or survivor basis. Hence, during the life time of either of the two depositors either person can take back the deposit for which no objection can be raised by either opposite party or others. In the event of death of either of the deposit holders, the surviving deposit holder can take back the deposit and the opposite party is liable to give the same and the legal heirs have no right and are not entitled to claim the amount and amount should not be given to them. One of the deposit holders named Thayuamma died on 22.09.2008 and the complainant is the survivor; hence, only the complainant is entitled to get the deposit amount. Since grandmother, Thayuamma’s death complainant has been permanently residing in Vizhuppuram, Tamilnadu. According to the complainant the deposit receipt has been misplaced by somebody and irrecoverably lost and being a surviving deposit holder complainant is a consumer. When opposite party was asked to pay the amount on the due date, opposite party demanded from the complainant the original fixed deposit receipt; stating that if the fixed deposit amount he is given without producing the original fixed deposit receipt and if some of them demands the fixed deposit amount by producing the original fixed deposit receipt, fixed deposit amount cannot be given. Hence, for a lawful complaint, an order from a responsible authorized centre should be produced. If the original fixed deposit receipt is lost, opposite party is liable to make a lawful enquiry to get for the purpose of guarantee an appropriate security to get the amount to the surveyor and accordingly to pay the amount. According to the complainant, since she is a consumer with no other remedy, complaint is filed before this Forum, thereby she prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the opposite party to pay to the complainant amount of FDR No.380 with interest and other appropriate relief.
The complaint was admitted and notice was issued to the opposite party to enter appearance and file version. In which the opposite party contends that she agrees to all the aversions mentioned in the complaint; according to the opposite party due to the below mentioned reasons amount was not paid to the complainant and there is no deficiency on the part of this opposite party. Opposite party also contends that when complainant was a minor, complainant in her name and in the name of her grandmother (Thayuamma) opened a “Swayamvardini” fixed deposit Rs.1,00,000/- on 17.06.2008 in opposite party bank, the same would mature on 16.06.2017 and at that time Rs.2,00,000/- would be received. For this deposit, fixed deposit receipt no.380 was also given to Thayuamma and the deposit was “either or survivor”. Hence, during their life time either of the two deposit holders can take fixed deposit maturity amount for which no dispute can be raised. In the event of death of either of the deposit holders, the surviving deposit holder can take the amount which the opposite party is liable to give and the legal heirs of deposit holders cannot claim the amount and to them amount should not be given. If the fixed deposit receipt is with nominee and if deposit holder dies, only to the nominee amount should be given. In case of dispute among legal heirs, after nominee receiving the amount case can be given against nominee for the amount or proportionate share and bank cannot wait upto the end of the dispute. Only to the nominee amount should be given. Thayuamma died on 22.09.2008 and the fixed deposit matured on 16.06.2017. After the death of Thayuamma, the surviving complainant was a minor and till complainant attains maturity, if any one comes with the fixed deposit receipt, to him or her amount should not be given. Showing this a letter was given by the complainant to the opposite party on 30.06.2011. Along with this letter, a copy of birth certificate of the complainant was also given. As per the birth certificate complainants date of birth was shown as 14.11.1996. On 28.06.2014 complainant sent a lawyer notice to the opposite party in which it was made clear that if legal heirs of Thayuamma bring the fixed deposit receipt, amount should not be given to them and the fixed deposit is either or survivor, after the death of Thayuamma complainant is only entitled to receive the amount after the maturity of the fixed deposit, opposite party sent a letter dated 25.07.2016 in which also it was mentioned that to others amount should not be given and only the complainant is entitled to receive the amount, but no demand to give the amount to the complainant was given or original fixed deposit receipt was not produced. Hence, amount cannot be given to the complainant which was also intimated to her. In the meanwhile, Shibu.C.B staying in Thayuamma Nilayam, Peechiyode sent a notice dated.23.06.2017 to the opposite party in which as per the will of Thayuamma, he is entitled to get deposit amount and amount should be given to him; showing this, a letter and a copy of the will were also given to the opposite party, but in the will, about this FDR nothing was shown and hence, FDR is either or survivor and opposite party contends that, they are not liable to analyze the will. Smt.Rajeswari, to receive the above mentioned fixed deposit amount a complaint was given to Palakkad Social Justice Officer and to enquire about this opposite party received a notice to appear before Vigilance Samithy on 11.02.2017, but a copy of Rajeswari’s complaint was not given to the opposite party. Opposite party appeared before the Vigilance Samithy sitting on 11.02.2017. Even if demanded, Rajeswari’s complaint was not given to the opposite party, but from the information received from the samithy, difficulties and legal hurdles in granting FDR amount to Rajeswari were presented before the samithy. Then on 10.01.2018 a notice came to appear before the Vigilance Samithy, for which a statement giving real facts was given. As per the existing law only to the survivor of the above fixed deposit, Akshaya, amount can be given, only if an order from the competent Forum comes. Smt.Rajeswari is entitled to receive the amount was mentioned in the statement. A notice was given to appear before the Samithy on 12.02.2018. At that time, in the above number, notice came; CC/19/2018 was existing case and competent authority was the Consumer Forum. Also showing clear facts statement was filed. Only on 20.12.2017, the complainant gave a letter asking for duplicate of FDR and giving of the amount. But, complainant was informed that reason for loss of original FDR should be clarified and since she was staying for a long time in Tamilnadu her identity should be made clear, indemnity bond should be given and if all these are convinced, only then lawfully amount can be given to the complainant, these were informed to her who told the opposite party that these cannot be done immediately and after organizing these she would contact the opposite party, but these were not given but complaint was filed. Opposite party also contends that, they are prepared to give the fixed deposit amount, but, for which legal formalities are to be complied. Hence, this opposite party prays to the Hon’ble Forum to direct the complainant to produce birth certificate, Aadhar card, letter of introduction from the local people, affidavit, indemnity bond and to avoid litigation expenses.
From the side of the complainant affidavit was filed and documents were marked as Exts.A1 to A4. From the side of opposite parties Exts.B1 to B4 were marked. Opposite party also filed affidavit.
The following issues crop up in this case.
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the side of the opposite parties?
- If so, the relief and cost admissible to the complainant?
Issues 1 & 2
The complaint is filed before this Forum to direct the opposite party to disburse the amount covered by FDR No.380 which matured on 16.06.2017. The fixed deposit is in the joint names of Thayuamma and her granddaughter named Akshayababu (Complainant) and payable to “either or survivor”. True photocopy of FD receipt in the opposite party bank is marked as Ext.A1 which shows FD number, FD amount, maturity date and value, period of deposit etc. Thayuamma died on 22.09.2008. Photocopy of death certificate of Thayamma is marked as Ext.A2 which shows name of death certificate issuing local body, date of death, place of death, address of the deceased at the time of death etc. At the time of death of Thayuamma, complainant was a minor the copy of birth certificate of the complainant is marked as Ext.A3 which indicates, complainants name, sex, date of birth, place of birth, registration number, date of registration etc. After the death of Thayuamma, complainant could not get the original FDR even after thorough check, at the time of death of Thayuamma, complainant was a minor and fixed deposit had not matured. Hence, letters were given to the opposite party’s on 30.06.2011, 28.06.2014 and 25.07.2016 informing them not to disburse the FDR amount to any person who came to the opposite parties with original fixed deposit receipt and the surviving complainant is the only person entitled to receive the FDR amount. After maturity of the fixed deposit complainant issued a notice on 26.12.2017 demanding the amount covered by FDR NO.380. Copy of this notice dated.26.12.2017 is marked as Ext.A4. Since the complainant could not produce the original FDR, the opposite party asked the complainant to produce documents to prove her identity and also local people’s affidavit regarding her identity and also directed the complainant to execute a bond and to get an order from this Forum, complainant who is a deposit holder, being a consumer. Hence complainant filed before this Forum a complaint for relief. According to the complainant she is prepared to comply all legal formalities directed by the opposite parties and does not press for cost. As per Consumer Protection Act even if the original FDR was lost the concerned opposite party bank has to disburse the amount to the survivor on maturity after complying the necessary legal formalities. In the reply version opposite party admits that in the joint names of the complainant and her grandmother named Thayuamma there is FDR No.380 maturing on 16.06.2017 which is on “either or survivor” basis. According to the opposite party, when this fixed deposit matures, the bank is liable to pay the maturity value to either of the joint deposit holders who comes to the bank and claims the amount. If either of the two joint holders dies, to the survivor the maturity amount is to be paid. About the legal heirs of the deceased deposit holder nothing should be asked and even if the legal heirs demand this amount it should not be paid to them. The fixed deposit in question matured on 16.06.2017, joint deposit holder named Thayuamma died on 22.09.2008, the date of birth of the complainant is 14.11.1996 and she became major on 14.11.2014. At the time of death of Thayuamma complainant was a minor. After Thayuamma’s death complainant had sent a notice dated.30.06.2011 to opposite party bank. True copy of this notice is marked as Ext.B1 which mentions that after the death of Thayuamma, complainant was entitled to get the fixed deposit amount and if any one brings original fixed deposit receipt, that amount should not be given to him/her. Also complainant sent her birth certificate to them, complainant also sent to this opposite party a lawyer notice dated.28.06.2014, true copy of this lawyer notice is marked as Ext.B2, which asks the opposite party bank to pay the maturity value of the fixed deposit in the opposite party bank only to the complainant. At this time the fixed deposit has not matured. Afterwards complainant gave a letter dated.25.07.2016 to this opposite party. Copy of this letter is marked as Ext.B3 which states that, as per FD receipt only the complainant is entitled to the amount and no other person is entitled to get this amount. Opposite party further contends that, complainant had come to the opposite party bank and informed the latter that she was staying in Vizhuppuram (Tamilnadu) with her parents, FDR was being kept by Thayuamma, after whose death the original FDR might be lost or any of the legal heirs might have taken it, and the same could not be recovered inspite of search. Opposite party also informed the complainant that they are willing to pay the amount to the complainant, but demanded from her Aadhar card to prove her identity, affidavit, identification in writing from two local persons, bond and an order from this Hon’ble Consumer Forum. In the meantime Shibu and Rajeswari demanded FDR amount, as contended by the opposite party, but, original Fixed Deposit Receipt was not produced. A copy of letter dated.23.06.2017 given by Shibu.C.B to this opposite party which is marked as Ext.B4 which asked this opposite party to pay him the fixed deposit amount in the name of Thayuamma. Opposite party also contended that, opposite party bank was prepared to give the amount to the complainant, but, she should comply the formalities.
In this connection, the following case decisions are worth noting.
1. “ Bank is bound to release the payment on maturity to surviving depositor, even
without original receipt ofcourse by taking other precautions (Parithosh Sinha vs
Chief General Manager, United Bank of India 1995 (2) C.P.R. 280 (St.C), West
Bengal)”.
2. “The surviving joint fixed deposit account holder is entitled to receive the
maturity value of fixed deposit along with interest”. (Central Bank of India vs
K.J.Joseph, 2001 (1) C.P.R. 359 (St.C), Uttar Pradesh)”.
By perusing the above judicial decisions and the documentary evidences produced before this Forum, we observe in this case that, the “Swayamvardini” fixed deposit jointly opened by the complainant and her deceased grandmother “on either or survivor basis” on 17.06.2008 in the opposite party bank has fallen due for payment on 16.06.2017 and the maturity value of this fixed deposit is not seen paid yet by the opposite party bank to the surviving deposit holder complainant. We also understand that complainant has produced necessary documents demanded by the opposite party bank for getting payment of the maturity value of this fixed deposit. Hence, we view that gross deficiency in service has been found to have been committed by the opposite party bank. In the result, complaint is allowed.
We direct the opposite party bank to pay to the complainant within one month maturity value of the concerned “Swayamvardini” fixed deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) together with interest @ 9% p.a on Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh only) for the period from 16.06.2017 (date of maturity of this fixed deposit) to realization.
This order should be complied within one month of the date of receipt of this order; otherwise complainant is also entitled to interest @ 9% p.a on the total amount due to her from the date of this order to realization.
Pronounced in the open court on this the 30th day of May 2018.
Sd/-
Shiny.P.R
President
Sd/-
Suma.K.P
Member
Sd/-
V.P.Anantha Narayanan
Member
Appendix
Exhibits marked on the side of complainant
Ext.A1 - Photocopy of Fixed Deposit Receipt issued by the
Secretary/President/Director of Vilayanchathanur Service Co-operative Bank
to Smt.Thayuamma & Akshaya
Ext.A2 - Photocopy of death certificate of Thayuamma issued by Special Grade
Secretary, Koduvayuur Grama Panchayath
Ext.A3 - Photocopy of birth certificate of the complainant issued by Registrar of
Births & Deaths, Palakkad Municipality, Palakkad
Ext.A4 - Copy of letter sent by the Complainant to the opposite party
dated.26.12.2017
Exhibits marked on the side of Opposite parties
Ext.B1 - True copy of a letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
dated.30.06.2011
Ext.B2 - True copy of notice sent by complainant’s counsel to the opposite party
dated.28.06.2014
Ext.B3 - True copy of letter sent by the complainant to the opposite party
dated.25.07.2016
Ext.B4 - True copy of letter sent by Shri.Shibu.C.B to the opposite party
dated.23.06.2017
Witness examined on the side of complainant
Nil
Witness examined on the side of opposite party
Nil
Cost and compensation for mental agony - Nil
