Punjab

Sangrur

CC/781/2022

Sukhvir Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Canara Bank Phirni Road - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Jagwinder Singh

04 Dec 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

 

                                                                    Complaint No.  781

                                                                    Instituted on:    15.11.2022

                                                                   Decided on:      04.12.2024

 

Sukhvir Singh aged 64 years son of Shri Mohinder Singh, resident of Naan Patti, Village Mangwal, District Sangrur 148001.

                                                         …. Complainant 

                                                 Versus

1.             Canara Bank, Phirni Road, Patiala Gate, Sangrur 148001 through its Branch Manager.

2.             Head office Canara Bank, J.C.Road No.112, P.B. Halsurpete, Nagarthpete, Bengaluru Karnataka 560001 through its Chairman.

3.             Registered office of Canara HSBC Oriental Bank of Commerce Life Insurance Pension 4 Life Plan, No.208, 2^nd Floor, Kanchenjunga Building, 18, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 through its Authorised Representative.

                                                        ..Opposite parties.

 

For the complainant  :       Shri K.C.Sharma, Adv.

For OP No.1&2         :       Exparte.

For OP No.3             :       Shri G.P.Sharma, Adv.

Quorum                                          

Jot Naranjan Singh Gill,                 :President

Sarita Garg,                                     :Member

Kanwaljeet Singh,                           :Member

 

ORDER

JOT NARANJAN SINGH GILL, PRESIDENT:

 

1.             Complainant  has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties on the ground that complainant is a consumer of the OPs number 1 and 2 by maintaining a saving bank account number 2488101005214 with OP number 1. Further case of complainant is that on 26.05.2020, the complainant sold some agriculture land for Rs.23,35,000/- and deposited the said proceeds in the bank account of the complainant on 26.05.2020 and 27.05.2020 and the balance at that time was Rs.23,36,521/-.  The complainant visited the bank branch of OP number 1 on 27.05.2020 for making FDRs of the amount outstanding in his account. The Branch Manager of the OPs deputed some officials of the branch for completion of FDR formalities and the complainant was assured that his FDR for Rs.10,18,000/- will fetch handsome interest  and got signatures from the complainant, but to the great surprise of the complainant when he visited the branch after completion of term of two years, a sum of Rs.7,55,600/- was credited on 22.7.2022 i.e. Rs.2,62,400/- less than the principal amount what to talk of giving interest on the FDR.  Further case of complainant is that he was handed over policy document having proposal number 9100914220 bearing policy number 0108349714 of Canara HSBC Oriental Bank of Commerce Life Insurance Pension4life Plan i.e. OP number 3 whereas the case of complainant is that he never chose any insurance policy from the OP as he visited only to get the FDR to earn interest on his hard earned money. Further case of complainant is that the complainant is already 64 yeas old and he has no permanent source of income and had sold the land to earn interest on the fixed deposit. Further case of complainant is that the bank has put the loss to the complainant to the tune of Rs.2,62,400/- from the principal amount and further interest on the amount of Rs.10,18,000/-.

2.             Further case of the complainant is that the complainant took up the matter with all the OPs and on this the incharge of the OP number 1 visited the house of the complainant on 27.09.2022 and assured that they are ready to make the payment with full interest and but to the utter surprise of the complainant, the OPs credited only a sum of Rs.1,99,489/- on 04.10.2022 and by this way, the OPs withheld an amount of Rs.62,911/- from the principal alongwith interest on the amount of Rs.10,18,000/-  from 27.5.2020 to 21.7.2022 which comes out as Rs.1,97,046/- and interest on Rs.2,62,400/- from 22.7.2022 to 3.10.2022 which comes out to be Rs.4,788/- and further interest on the balance amount i.e. Rs.62,911/- till the date of payment, so the total recoverable amount is said to be Rs.1,97,046/- plus Rs.4,788/- plus Rs.62,911/- and interest thereon from 4.10.2022 i.e. Rs.2,64,745/- plus interest on Rs.62,911/- till the date of payment. Though the OPs assured that the payment will be refunded in full alongwith interest, but the same was not done.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to refund the balance principal amount of Rs.62,911/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum and interest of Rs.1,97,046/- on the principal i.e. on Rs.10,18,000/- from the date of deposit from 27.05.2020 to 21.07.2022. Since the Ops credited the amount of Rs.7,55,600/- on 22.7.2022 in the account of the complainant so the interest on Rs.2,62,400/- comes out to be Rs.4,788/- and further interest on the balance principal amount i.e. Rs.62,911/- till the date of payment, as such the total amount payable comes to be Rs.2,64,745/- plus interest on Rs.62,911/-. Further the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- on account of compensation for mental tension and further an amount of Rs.35,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

3.             Record shows that the OPs number 1 and 2 did not appear despite service, as such they were proceeded against exparte on 23.01.2023.

4.             In reply filed by OP number 3, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complaint of the complainant is false, malicious, incorrect and has been filed with a malafide intention and is liable to be dismissed, that the complaint filed by the complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer dispute, that the complainant after completely understanding the terms and conditions of the product voluntarily applied for an insurance policy bearing number 0108349714 and provided all the relevant details and deposited Rs.10,18,000/- and as such the OPs assured to pay a sum of Rs.62,910/- as an annuity benefit towards the said policy to the complainant. The complainant obtained the policy after signing the proposal form. Further it is averred that the complainant contacted the OP in or around July, 2022 and blatantly stated that he is not aware of the insurance policy in question and wants to cancellation of the same and refund of the entire amount of Rs.10,18,000/-. Further the stand of the OP is that after cancellation of the policy, the OP transferred a sum of Rs.7,55,600/- to the account of the complainant on 22.7.2022 and the same has already been admitted by the complainant. Thereafter the complainant filed a complaint against the OP before the Ombudsman and after that the OP number 3 further transferred an amount of Rs.1,99,490/- to the account of the complainant on 4.10.2022. As such, the OP number 3 had paid a total sum of Rs.10,18,000/- to the account of the complainant.  Thus, the OP number 3 has stated that whole of the amount has already been refunded to the complainant. On merits, it is stated that the complainant had deposited the total amount of Rs.10,18,000/- with the OP number 3 and the same amount has already been refunded to the complainant and nothing remains due against the OP.  As such, OP number 3 has prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.

5.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit of the complainant, Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-16 copies of various documents and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 3 has produced Ex.OP3/1 self attested affidavit, Ex.OP3/2 copy of proposal form and closed evidence.

6.             We have gone through the pleadings put in by the complainant and OP number 3  along with their supporting documents with their valuable assistance.

7.             The learned counsel for the complainant has argued vehemently  that the complainant availed the services of the OPs for getting a FDR of Rs.10,18,000/- but instead of depositing the amount in the FDR, the OPs invested the said amount of Rs.10,18,000/- in the insurance policy, which he came to know when he visited the OPs to get the maturity amount.  Further the learned counsel has contended that out of the said deposited amount, the OPs have refunded an amount of Rs.7,55,600/- to the complainant on 22.7.2022 and Rs.1,99,490/- on 4.10.2022 when he protested for getting the amount. The complainant has also produced on record the copy of letter dated 7.9.2022 Ex.C-2 sent to the OPs for refund of the amount. Ex.C-4 is the copy of the insurance policy. Ex.C-12 is the copy of letter of the OP number 3 dated 26.09.2022 addressed to the complainant Sukhvir Singh, wherein it has clearly been mentioned that taking due cognizance of the request of complainant, the company has agreed to cancel the said policy and refund the premium paid towards the policy purely as a good customer service gesture. Ex.C-13 and Ex.C-14 are again the copies of letters dated 6.10.2022 for refund of the so deposited amount with the OPs.   Now, the grievance of the complainant is that the OPs are still liable to pay interest on the deposited amount and further the OPs are liable to refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.62910/- i.e. the remaining amount from the deposited amount of Rs.10,18,000/- as the OPs have already refunded an amount of Rs.9,55,090/-   (Rs.7,55,600/- plus Rs.1,99,490/-  as detailed above).  On the other hand, the stand of the OP number 3 at page number 4 of the written reply is that the amount of Rs.62,910/- has already been credited in the account of the complainant on 17.05.2021, but the complainant has contended that this amount was never credited in the account of the complainant. To support this contention, the complainant has produced on record the copy of bank statement of account Ex.C-3/1 to Ex.C-3/3 of Canara Bank Sangrur and we have perused the same but found no such entry was there of Rs.62910/- showing credit to the account of the complainant. Further we have perused the copy of statement of account Ex.C-3/5 of  Canara Bank Sangrur, wherein it was found that an amount of Rs.7,55,600.60 was credited in the account of the complainant on 22.07.2022 and  further an amount of Rs.1,99,489.40 was credited in the account of the complainant on 4.10.2022.  In the circumstances of the case, we may mention that the OPs have produced nothing on record to show that the amount of Rs.62910/- was ever credited/refunded to the complainant on 17.05.2021. There is no explanation from the side of the OPs that how such amount of Rs.62910/- was paid to the complainant. As such, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs as the OPs invested the FDR amount of the complainant in the insurance policy, which was never chosen by the complainant. Under the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that OPs are liable to refund the remaining amount of Rs.62910/- to the complainant alongwith interest.  Further we find that the OPs are also liable to pay to the complainant the interest on the amount of Rs.7,55,600/- for the period from 27.5.2020 to 22.7.2022 and on the amount of Rs.1,99,490/- for the period from 27.5.2020 to 04.10.2022.

8.             In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.62,910/- alongwith interest @ 7% per annum from 27.5.2020 till its realisation in full. We further direct the Ops to pay to the complainant only the interest @ 7% per annum on the already refunded amount of Rs.7,55,600/- for the period from 27.5.2020 to 22.7.2022 and also pay only the interest @ 7% per annum on the already refunded amount of Rs.1,99,490/- for the period from 27.5.2020 to 04.10.2022. We also direct the OPs to pay further an amount of Rs.10,000/- in lieu of compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment and an amount of Rs.10,000/- on account of litigation expenses.

9.             The complaint could not be decided within the statutory time period due to heavy pendency of cases.

10.           This order be complied with within a period of sixty days of its communication. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.   

                        Pronounced.

                       December 4, 2024.