Date of Filing :21.01.2017
Date of Disposal :29.02.2024
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:29.02.2024
PRESENT
HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT
Mr K BSANGANNANAVAR: JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER
APPEAL No.433/2018
Mr Muneer Ahamed Khan,
S/o Late Nazir Ahamed,
Aged about 67 years,
R/a No.214, 6th Main Road,
KEB Layout, BTM Layout,
1st Stage, Bengaluru – 560029.
(By Mr V A Mohan Rangam, Advocate) Appellant
-Versus-
The Senior Manager
Canara Bank,
BTM Branch,
1st Stage, Bengaluru – 560029. Respondent
(By Mrs T N Asha, Advocate)
:ORDER:
Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT
1. This Appeal is filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by the Complainant, aggrieved by the Order dated 22.02.2018 passed in Consumer Complaint No.1108/2013 on the file of II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bangalore(hereinafter referred to as the District Forum).
2. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsels on record. Perused the Impugned Order, grounds of Appeal and secured records from the District Forum.
3. The District Forum after enquiring into the matter, Dismissed the Complaint with no costs. Being not satisfied with the Order, Complainant is in Appeal.
4. Perusal of the records reveals that the Complainant averred that he had deposited RFC KAMADENU US $ sum of Rs.33,764.48 with OP for the duration of 07.12.2010 to 06.12.2011 for one year and that it shall carry interest @ 1.79% p.a. Further Complainant was granted VSL of Rs.11,98,258/- with interest at 9%. Subsequently, the Complainant had requested the OP for closing of VSL accounts and OP charged at BPLR 1% and thereby difference in interest of Rs.1,05,211 was charged in respect of the VSL account. The allegation of the Complainant is that the US Dollar deposited was closed at the whims & fancies of the OP and on 23.06.2011 the Exchange Rate for the US Dollar to Indian Rupees was 44.9245 INR, but, on the date of maturity of the deposited amount, i.e., on 07.12.2011 the Exchange Rate of the Dollar to Indian Rupees was 51,8046 INR, i.e., the selling rate of the US Dollar was at a lower rate and he was put to financial loss.
5. Per contra, OP in his Version, pleaded that the RFC deposit of US Dollar of Rs 33,76,448/- last renewed for a period of 12 month i.e., from 07.12.2010 to 06.12.2011, with 1.79% interest p.a against RFC Deposit and the Complainant was granted VSL Loan of Rs.11,98,258/- on 15.07.2009 at 9% rate of interest. The actual rate of interest on VSL loan against RFC deposit should have been charged at BPLR (benchmark prime lending rate) rate at 12% p.a, but, inadvertently had charged 9% and it has debited the differential interest to the loan account amounting to Rs.1,05,211/-. Further stated that, as per request made by the Complainant for closing of Value Secured Loans Account explained him the Rules & Regulations governing for closure of the RFC (Resident Foreign Currency)deposit, whereby, no interest would be given on the above said Deposit and thereafter permanently closed the RFC VSL account.
6. It is not in dispute that the Complainant is a SB Account holder of OP and deposited RFC KAMADENU US $ sum of Rs.33,764.48 with OP for the period 07.12.2010 to 06.12.2011 for one year with interest @ 1.79% p.a and he had availed VSL of Rs.11,98,258/- at 9% rate of interest, but, OP changed the rate of interest as per BPLR rate from 9% to 12% and debited differential interest of Rs.1,05,211/- to the Loan Account. It is also not in dispute that, as per request of the Complainant, OP closed the VSL accounts by charging rate of BPLR at 1% and thereby there is adifference in interest of Rs.1,05,211 in respect of the VSL account.
7. The observation of the District Forum in Para 11 of its Impugned Order that ‘as per document Annexure – RK, Page No 43 clearly shows that, in case of premature closure of the Deposit, penal cut of 1% is to be levied on the applicable rate of interest, for the period for which the deposit has actually run, as ruling on the date of deposit. If the applicable rate of interest for the period run is less than 1%, no interest should be paid for closure before maturity. Hence, when OP has closed the Deposit, deducted the charges and interest as per Circulars and guidelines of RBI for pre-closure of the deposit account and the Complainant is not eligible to get interest on that deposit. It is a known fact that the Complainant had taken loan against RFC Kamadhenu deposit, then after closing the VSL loan account, it is known fact that by exchanging the US Dollar deposit to Indian currency by deducting interest on loan account and the balance amount has been debited to the account and the balance amount was debited in the account of the Complainant. Hence, question do not arise to consider on the date of maturing of the deposit on 06.12.2011 the exchange rate of the US Dollar was 51.8046 as per Annexure-E and F produced by the Complainant’. Thus, the allegation of the Complainant, that on 23.06.2011 the US Dollar Indian Rupees was 44.9245 INR, but, on maturity deposit date 07.12.2011 the dollar rate on Indian Rupees was 51,8046 INR by selling the US dollar at a lower rate and he was put to financial loss because of OP cannot be accepted, since,Complainant himself has given consent for pre-closure of the said deposit and OP acted as per rules according to the Circulars and guidelines of RBI for pre-closure of deposit account and it cannot be termed as Deficiency in service and Unfair Trade Practice. In the circumstances, Impugned Order is just and does not call for any inference. Accordingly, Appeal stands Dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. Return the LCR forthwith to the District Commission.
9. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission, as well as to the parties concerned, immediately.
Lady Member Judicial Member President
*s
