Date of filing : 07/12/2017
Order No. 6 dt. 02/04/2018
The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant along with his mother is the joint account holders of the savings bank account no. 015110106118 at Canara Bank, College Street Branch. The complainant notices that on 27.7.17 Rs.5522/- had been deducted from the said account of the complainant as a charge for locker rent at Gariahat Branch. The complainant never had or requested for any locker at Canara Bank, Gariahat Branch. The complainant informed the said fact to the Branch Manager, College Street Branch. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case with the allegation that there was unfair trade practice made by the o.p. bank and the complainant suffered mental harassment for deduction of the said amount and the complainant being a teacher and for having the correspondences with the bank the complainant had to suffer for disruption for his regular activities for which he also claimed compensation of Rs.10,000/-.
The o.ps. contested the case by filing w.v and denied all the material allegations of the complaint. It was stated that due to mistake on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank the account of the complainant held with o.p. no.1 bank had been wrongly debited by o.p. no.2 bank. On 1.8.17 o.p. no.2 bank received a mail from o.p. no.1 for reversing the locker rent debited from the account of the complainant, but o.p. no.2 replied that they are unable to refund the debited locker rent as the system is getting upgraded at head office level and they have taken the matter with head office. Even after repeated request from o.p. no.1 bank to o.p. no.2 bank regarding the reversal of debited locker rent of the complainant; o.p. no.2 was unable to refund the same due to technical problem. The locker rent debited from the account of the complainant was refunded ultimately on 28.12.17. The o.p. no.1 bank has time and again intimated to o.p. no.2 bank regarding the wrongful debit. The mistake has occurred on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank while debiting the account and mentioning the wrong branch code. The branch code of o.p. no.2 is 0150 and the branch code of o.p. no.1 is 0151. The account of the complainant and that of Subhajit Majumder held that o.p. no.2 bank is same i.e. 1618. The officials of o.p. no.2 branch has wrongly entered the branch code. Since the account number of the complainant being the same as that of Subhajit Majumder, the account of the complainant was wrongly debited for amount of Rs.5522/-. There is no locker in the name of the complainant or his mother Suruchi Dutta with o.p. no.2 branch. The o.p. no.2 bank does not have any malafide intention to cause any harassment of financial loss to the complainant as the mistake on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank has been caused due to inadvertence of human error in putting the proper material while debiting the account from Subhajit Majumder instead of the complainant and the delay was committed due to technical problems in the operating system and the o.p. bank has also tendered its apology to the complainant and was again tendering its unconditional apology to the complainant. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for passing necessary order to that effect.
On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties following points are to be decided:
- Whether the complainant is the account holder o.p. no.1 bank?
- Whether there was any deduction of the amount from the account of the complainant towards the locker rent?
- Whether there is any unfair trade practice or deficiency in service on the part of o.ps.?
- Whether the complainant will be entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons :-
All the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and avoidance of repetition of facts.
Ld. Lawyer for the complainant argued that the complainant along with his mother is the joint account holders of the savings bank account no.015110106118 at Canara Bank, College Street Branch. The complainant noticed that on 27.7.17 Rs.5522/- had been deducted from the said account of the complainant as a charge for locker rent at Gariahat Branch. The complainant never had or requested for any locker at Canara Bank, Gariahat Branch. The complainant informed the said fact to the Branch Manager, College Street Branch. On the basis of the said fact the complainant filed this case with the allegation that there was unfair trade practice made by the o.p. bank and the complainant suffered mental harassment for deduction of the said amount and the complainant being a teacher and for having the correspondences with the bank the complainant had to suffer for disruption for his regular activities for which he also claimed compensation.
Ld. Lawyer for the o.ps. argued that due to mistake on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank the account of the complainant held with o.p. no.1 bank had been wrongly debited by o.p. no.2 bank. On 1.8.17 o.p. no.2 bank received a mail from o.p. no.1 for reversing the locker rent debited from the account of the complainant, but o.p. no.2 replied that they are unable to refund the debited locker rent as the system is getting upgraded at head office level and they have taken the matter with head office. Even after repeated request from o.p. no.1 bank to o.p. no.2 bank regarding the reversal of debited locker rent of the complainant; o.p. no.2 was unable to refund the same due to technical problem. The locker rent debited from the account of the complainant was refunded ultimately on 28.12.17. The o.p. no.1 bank has time and again intimated to o.p. no.2 bank regarding the wrongful debit. The mistake has occurred on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank while debiting the account and mentioning the wrong branch code. The branch code of o.p. no.2 is 0150 and the branch code of o.p. no.1 is 0151. The account of the complainant and that of Subhajit Majumder held that o.p. no.2 bank is same i.e. 1618. The officials of o.p. no.2 branch has wrongly entered the branch code. Since the account number of the complainant being the same as that of Subhajit Majumder, the account of the complainant was wrongly debited for amount of Rs.5522/-. There is no locker in the name of the complainant or his mother Suruchi Dutta with o.p. no.2 branch. The o.p. no.2 bank does not have any malafide intention to cause any harassment of financial loss to the complainant as the mistake on the part of the officials of o.p. no.2 bank has been caused due to inadvertence of human error in putting the proper material while debiting the account from Subhajit Majumder instead of the complainant and the delay was committed due to technical problems in the operating system and the o.p. bank has also tendered its apology to the complainant and was again tendering its unconditional apology to the complainant. On the basis of the said fact o.ps. prayed for passing necessary order to that effect.
Considering the submissions of the respective parties it is an admitted fact that the complainant has the account with o.p. no.1 bank and the said account being a joint account with his mother and the complainant never has / had any locker in the o.p. no.1 bank or they maintained any locker in the bank of o.p. no.2. It is found from the materials on record that an amount of Rs.5522/- was deducted from the account of the complainant due to mistake on the part of o.p. no.2 bank. It is crystal clear that one Subhajit Majumder held an account with o.p. no.2 bank and the account number being the same with the complainant and instead of deducting of locker rent from the said account of Subhajit Majumder the amount was debited from the account of the complainant. The o.p. no.1 bank after detection of the said fault made contact with o.p. no.2, but due to technical snag the amount could not be credited in the account of the complainant, though the defect was detected at the early stage. The bank officials attached to o.p. no.2 bank wrongly debited the account and instead of mentioning the branch code of 0150 the dealing officer mentioned the branch code of o.p. no.1 i.e. 0151. Because of such fault on the part of the bank officials of o.p. no.2 the amount was deducted. It is found from the materials on record that the amount was reversed in the account of the complainant after detection of the said human error by o.p. no.2 bank. It is undoubtedly for such fault the complainant has suffered mental harassment for which the complainant will be entitled to get compensation as well as litigation cost. Thus all the points are disposed of accordingly.
Hence, ordered,
That the CC No.349/2017 is allowed on contest with cost against the o.p. no.2 and dismissed on contest without cost against other o.ps. The o.p. no.2 is directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) only within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 8% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
