DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PALAKKAD
DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024.
PRESENT : SRI. VINAY MENON .V,
: SMT.VIDYA A., MEMBER.
: SRI. KRISHNANKUTTY N.K, MEMBER.
DATE OF FILING:02.06.2023.
CC/145/2023
Swaraswathy, W/o. Sethumadhavan - Complainant
Radhakrishna Nivas, Ellapullythara PO,
Palakkad.
(By Adv.Shine Francis)
Vs
1. Canara Bank Head Office, 112, J.C.Road, -Opposite Parties
Bangalore-560 002.
2. Canara Bank, Regional Office, 1st Floor,
Maskan Towers Pirivushala,
Chandranagar PO, Palakkad.
3. Canara Bank, Chittur, Palakkad,
Id: 105735 Rep by Branch Manager.
4. Canara Bank, madhukarai Bank,
Rep. by Branch Manager.
(For OP1 to P4 by Adv. A.K.Priya Anil)
ORDER
BY SMT.VIDYA A., MEMBER.
1. The complainant’s sister Late Sathyabhama was an account holder of the opposite party, Bank. She had 7 FD Accounts with 3rd opposite party with account numbers 04000771, 04000795, 04000798, 04000799, 04001023, 04001100 and 15000082 and one Savings Account with 4th opposite party with account No.1232101004078.
The complainant’s sister expired on 13.04.2021 and since there was no nominee assigned by her, the complainant and other successors preferred SOP 3/22 before the Sub court, Palakkad and it was allowed declaring the complainant and other three persons as successors.
The complainant preferred a death claim before the 3rd opposite party on 27.03.2023. After receiving the claim form along with succession certificate, nothing was done by the 3rd opposite party. Later, she produced the order in SOP 3/22 before the 3rd opposite party as per their demand. Then they asked the complainant to open an account with 3rd opposite party for settling the claim. Since she had an account with the ESAF Bank she was not ready for that. Later, when she enquired about the claim, the 3rd opposite party informed her that they received a memo from the 4th opposite party stating that excess pension was received by her deceased sister. She then contacted the 4th opposite party to give a statement to that effect. But the 3rd and 4th opposite parties did not do anything to settle the claim. They did not respond to the lawyer notice send by the complainant.
The acts of the opposite parties amount to clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.
So, the complainant filed this complaint for getting the following reliefs.
1. To direct the opposite parties to settle the death claim amount to the complainant.
2. To pay a compensation of Rs.10 lakhs towards the mental agony and sufferings caused to her.
3. Any other reliefs which the Commission find fit and proper to grant.
2. After admitting complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. They entered appearance and filed version.
3. The opposite parties in their version admitted that the deceased Sathya Bhama had 7 Fixed Deposit Account with 3rd opposite party and one Savings Bank Account with 4th opposite party and all the FD accounts are closed on 03.06.2023 and the saving account was closed on 26.06.2023. Since there was no nominee for the FD, and later on when the order was produced after deleting the lien, the Bank disbursed the amount in tune with the succession certificate issued by Hon’ble Sub Court, Palakkad in SOP No.3/22. It is adamant nature of the complainant refusing to start any Savings Bank Account at Chittur Branch for settling the amount caused the delay as the norms of Bank insist that if FD Accounts are closed, money can be transferred only through Savings Bank Account. Further, a memo was received from the 4th opposite party stating that excess pension was received by the deceased. They denied the allegation of refusal on the part of the 4th opposite party to give the statement. The Bank cannot provide statement of account to 3rd parties on the basis of phone call. Since the claim was put forward by the 3rd parties who were not even nominees of the deceased, the Bank required clarifications and lien over the accounts issued by the 4th opposite party for the amounts due to TN State Government which made the complainant annoyed and caused to proceed against the opposite parties.
The District Treasury, Coimbatore had issued letter dated 31.08.2019 demanding the return of excess amount of Rs.4,15,307/- credited to the Savings Bank account of the deceased with 4th opposite party. Subsequent to that, the 4th opposite party requested the Treasury, Coimbatore regarding further clarification on the issue and there was delay in receiving the reply.
During the life time, Sathyabhama utilised the amount for her personal purpose and the Government is entitled to recover the public fund which is the difference in amount paid in excess. The 4th opposite party had refunded the amount to the Treasury on 16.05.2023 and issued a DD for an amount of Rs.1,40,430/- dated 16.05.2023 in favour of Treasury Officer, Coimbatore. The lien over the savings account was lifted only after the refund. Since the complainant was not ready to start a new savings account, with the 3rd opposite party, the bank had to wait till lien over the account maintained with the 4th opposite party is lifted. After that, on 03.06.2023, the 3rd opposite party transferred the amounts in the FD accounts to savings account with the 4th opposite party which was credited to the complainant’s account with the ESAF Bank on 03.06.2023 itself. The complainant approached the 4th opposite party and submitted application to close the savings account on 23.06.2023 which was closed on the next working day ie on 26.06.2023.
Since Banks are the custodian of large amount of public funds, it needs reasonable time to settle claims in exceptional cases. There is no wilful latches or delay on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, they prayed for the dismissal of the complaint with their cost.
4. From the pleadings of parties, the following points were framed for consideration.
1. Whether there was any unreasonable delay on the part of the Bank in settling the claim?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs claimed?
4. Any other reliefs.
5. Complainants evidence comprised of proof affidavit and Exts.A1 to A4 documents. Marking of Ext.A1 is objected as it is a photocopy; Ext.A2 is objected as it is a photocopy and does not contain the signature of issuing authority. The opposite party filed an application as IA.No.101/2024 to cross examine the complainant and it was dismissed. The opposite party also filed proof affidavit and Exts.B1 to B7 marked from their side. Opposite party filed notes of argument.
6. Point No.1
Complainant’s sister expired on 13.04.2021 and since there was no nominee assigned for her Bank Accounts, the complainant and other opposite parties preferred SOP 3/2022 before the Sub Court, Palakkad and it was allowed declaring the complainant and other sisters as successors. After receiving the succession certificate, she preferred a death claim before the 3rd opposite party on 27.03.2023. Even after receiving this, they did not settle the complainant’s claim.
7. The complainant produced four documents Ext.A1 is the copy of SOP No.3/22, before the Hon’ble Sub Court, Palakkad. Ext.A2 is the order in the SOP. Ext.A3 and A4 are the lawyer notice and AD Card.
8. The complainant contended that the 3rd opposite party had asked her to open an account with them for which she was not ready as she has already having account with ESAF Bank. Further, the 4th opposite party had issued a memo stating that the deceased had received excess pension.
9. The opposite party had stated that the death claim dated 27.03.2023 is settled and all the accounts mentioned in the complaint are closed and no amount is due to the complainant. There is no wilful delay on their part. After receiving the copy of the order in SOP No.3/22, the 3rd opposite party started proceeding with the death claim with regard to the FD Account maintained with them. In the meanwhile they received a letter dated 15.05.2023 from Treasury, Coimbatore demanding the return of the excess amount of pension amounting to Rs.1,40,430/- which was credited to the Savings Bank account of the deceased with the 4th opposite party. It was due to the delay in informing the death of Satyabhama to Treasury Coimbatore. On 16.05.2023, DD was issued in favour of Treasury Office, Coimbatore.
10. Ext.B3 is the letter from Treasuries and Accounts Department, Coimbatore to The Branch Manager, Canara Bank (4th OP) dated 15.05.2023. In this, it is stated that Sathyabhama has expired on 13.04.2021. But the pension was paid upto the month of August, 2021 leading to the excess payment of Rs.1,40,430/-. They requested for the refund of excess amount through DD in favour of Treasury Officer, Coimbatore for crediting it into Government Account.
Ext.B4 is the Pension “Pay Drawn Details Report” which shows the total amount as Rs.1,40,430/-. Ext.B5 is the letter from 4th opposite party to the Treasury Officer, Coimbatore dated 18.05.2023 showing the refund of excess amount through DD.
11. The opposite party had contended that after complying all the legal formalities, FDs were closed on 03.06.2023 and Savings Bank account was closed on 26.06.2023 and the amount was credited to the complainant’s account.
12. From the evidence adduced, it is clear that the death claim dated 27.03.2023 preferred by the complainant was settled within three months. This delay was only due to the necessity of complying the legal formalities. So, there is no unreasonable delay on the part of the opposite parties in settling the claim. Point No.1 is found in favour of the opposite parties.
13. Points 2 to 4
As per the conclusion arrived at in point No.1, there is no unreasonable delay on the part of the opposite parties in settling the death claim. Hence, no deficiency in service can be attributed on the opposite parties and the complainant is not entitled to the reliefs claimed.
In the result, complaint is dismissed.
Pronounced in open court on this the 30th day of September, 2024.
Sd/-
VINAY MENON .V, PRESIDENT
Sd/-
VIDYA A., MEMBER.
APPENDIX
Documents marked from the side of the complainant:
Ext.A1: Copy of SOP 3/22 filed before the Sub Court, Palakkad.
Ext.A2: Copy of succession certificate.
Ext.A3: Copy of lawyer notice and postal receipt.
Ext.A4: A/D cards.
Document marked from the side of Opposite party:
Ext.B1: Printout out of the Mail sent by the 4th opposite party to the District Treasury, Coimbatore regarding the recovery of pension.
Ext.B2: Letter issued by the 4th opposite party to the Refund of Undrawn Pension.
Ext.B3: Memo issued by District Treasuries and Accounts Department Coimbatore.
Ext.B4: Demand Draft issued by the 4th opposite party in favour of treasury officer, Coimbatore.
Ext.B5: Letter issued by the 4th opposite party to the District Treasury, Coimbatore regarding the refund of Undrawn Pension.
Ext.B6: Computer print out of the statement of loan account with A/c.No.1232101004078 maintained by the plaintiff bank in the name of the deceased Sathyabama. K.
Document marked from the side of Court: Nil
Witness examined on the side of the complainant: Nil
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party: Nil
Court witness: Nil
Cost : 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.
