Heard the learned counsel for both the sides.
2. This appeal is filed U/S-15 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum.
3. The case of the complainant, in nutshell is that the complainants are legal heirs of Late Vikash Chandra Agrawal who had opened a current account with the Op in the name of Tarang Industry vide current account No.019405000568. On 28.04.2012 Vikash Chandra Agrawal died in a road accident leaving behind him the complainant as legal heir. Thereafter that account was credited with further money and on the date of filing of the case there was Rs.13,54,126/- in the account of deceased. It is alleged inter-alia that the complainants applied to the OP-Bank to withdraw but the OP did not allow same and required the death certificate and legal heir certificates with further documents. The complainant produced the certificates but could not produce the succession certificate for which the OP did not allow to operate the account. Finding no other way the complaint was filed.
4. The OP took the plea that they have opened the current account in favour of the Vikash Chandra Agrawal but the complainants’ legal heirs did not file the documents as asked for, as such they have refused to operate the account.
5. After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum has passed the following order:-
Xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx
“The Ops are to release the money i.e. Rs.13,54,126.13 lying in the current account of the deceased to the complainant alongwith 4 % interest from the date deposit of the whole amount within a month of this order alongwith Rs.20,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and pain to the complainant and litigation ex-parte. The complainant is to file an indemnity bond to the satisfaction of the OP before release of the money.”
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that learned District Forum has committed error in law by not considering the written version with proper perspectives. According to him as per banking rule they have asked to produce the succession certificate but the complainant did not produce same. Learned District Forum ought to have considered the fact and law. Therefore, he submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that RBI guideline has stated for relaxation of production of succession certificate for repayment to the legal heirs of the deceased account holder but in the instant case the OP asked for the succession certificate instead of legal heir certificates and it would takes more time to obtain a succession certificate. However, he submitted that they are ready with the legal heir certificate with satisfaction of the OP-Bank. So, the impugned order should be confirmed.
8. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, perused the DFR and impugned order .
9. It is admitted fact that the deceased Vikash Chandra Agarwala has Rs.13,54,126.13 in his current account. It is also not in dispute that the complainants are legal heirs but the OP took plea that there are others also demanding the money. But the OP has not filed any piece of paper of any other person other than the complainants demanding the money. The RBI circular issued in 2005 is clear to show that bank has to adopt simplifying procedure to pay money to the legal heirs. The legal heir certificate issued by the Tahasildar on 23.08.2012 clearly shows that complainants are the successors of Late Vikash Chandra Agarwal. During course of argument, learned counsel for the appellant agrees to disburse the amount subject to order of this Commission.
10. It is well known that issue of succession certificate would be time consuming and the complainants alleged that they are in need of money. Therefore, in the simple manner we want to dispose of the matter by directing the OP to pay the entire current account money of Vikash Chandra Agarwal to the complainants on proper identification with usual undertaking. It has brought to our notice that complainant no.2 & 3 became major in the meantime. Their consent may be taken authorizing complainant No1-mother to accept money on their behalf also.
11. Learned District Forum has passed order to award 4 % interest on said payment to pay besides award of compensation of Rs.20,000/-. Since, the current account does not carry any interest as baking norm, such order to pay interest @ 4 % on said amount is set-aside. So far compensation of Rs.20,000/- is concerned, we deem it proper to award Rs.10,000/- towards compensation.
12. In view of aforesaid discussion, while confirming the impugned order we modified the order by directing the OP to pay entire current account money Rs.13,54,116/- to the complainant No.1 with consent of OP No.2 & 3 as discussed above to accept money on behalf of self and on behalf of complainant no.2 & 3 and further directed to pay the compensation of Rs.10,000/- to complainant no.1 for self and on behalf of complainant no.2 & 3 within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which all would carry @ 12 % interest from the date of this order till date of payment.
Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No Cost.
Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the CONFONET or website of this Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.
DFR be sent back forthwith.
