Chandigarh

StateCommission

RP/3/2022

HDFC Bank Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

St. Thomas School - Opp.Party(s)

S.C. Thatai, Nitin Thatai & Rupali Adv.

10 Mar 2022

ORDER

 STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

 

Revision Petition No.	:	03 of 2022
Date of Institution	:	28.02.2022
Date of Decision	:	10.03.2022

 

1. HDFC Bank Ltd. (Yamuna Nagar Branch) Plot No.1, Rajesh Nagar Colony, Ambala Road, Yamuna Nagar, through Sh.Rachin Kansal, Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd.
2. HDFC Bank Ltd, Plot No.28, Industrial Area Phase 1, Chandigarh through Sh.Rachin Kansal, Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Ltd.

...Revision Petitioners/Opposite parties

Versus

 

St. Thomas School, Civil Lines Road, Gopal Nagar, Gomti Mohalla, Jagadhri, Haryana through its Principal Mrs. Chandana Lall, aged about 53 years W/o Late Sh.Sundeep Lall.

•  

BEFORE:       JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                      MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                      MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

 

Present:        Sh.Nitin Thatai, Advocate for the revision petitioners.

Sh.Yogesh Goel, Sh.Deepak Goyal and Sh.Vipul Goel, Advocates for the respondent.

 

JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                   The opposite parties-HDFC Bank have impugned the interim order dated 15.02.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short the District Commission), vide which the HDFC Bank was directed to defreeze the bank account of the complainant- St.Thomas School (respondent before this Commission) within seven days from 15.02.2022, failing which, they were directed to pay Rs.1000/- per day as penalty to the complainant.

2.           The facts which are necessary for disposal of this case are that on 26.08.2015, Bank Account bearing Account No. 50100117060303 ID No. 6398161 was opened in the name of "St. Thomas School Jagadhri" with the opposite parties-HDFC Bank, under Signatures and Representation of Dr. A. D. Lyall (then Secretary/ Treasurer); Mr. Suresh Martin Chauhan (then Manager); Mr. Noel Surandre Dass (Administrative Officer); and Mr. James Prashar of complainant school. It is the case of the complainant that the HDFC Bank failed to close the said account, despite making requests to it. Following pleas have been taken by the complainant in its complaint in para no.8 to 11 as under:-

“That thereafter the complainant school approached OP’s for closure of said bank account vide Request Letter dated 30.02.2018, which was duly received by OP's. The copy of Request Letter dated 03.02.2018 is annexed herewith as EXHIBIT C-7.

 

9. That thereafter, various meetings were held between representatives of complainant school with OP's and OP's requested to move fresh application to activate the bank account, therefore complainant school. again approached OP's vide Letter dated 11.07.2019 to activate the said bank account and also submitted Court Order dated 16.05.2019 showing all cases withdrawn by parties. The copy of Letter dated 11.07.2019 is annexed herewith as EXHIBIT C-8.

 

10. That upon Letter dated 11.07.2019 (EXHIBIT C-8), OP's informed that said bank account maintained with OP's, has been kept at "No Debit Status" on the false premise that registration of school has been cancelled by Registrar of Societies and in the absence of court order, OP's is unable to take any action in respect of said account. The copy of Letter dated 16.07.2019 is annexed herewith as EXHIBIT C-9.

 

11. That thereafter, complainant school got issued notice to OP's through its advocate for granting permission to operate the said bank account vide Notice dated 13.08.2019, but no reply was given. The copy of Notice dated 13.08.2019 is annexed herewith as EXHIBIT C-10.”

 

3.           The opposite parties have strongly contested their case before the District Commission, by way of filing written reply and evidence by way of affidavit.
4.           However, during pendency of the consumer complaint before the District Commission, on 20.01.2022, it was stated by Counsel for the opposite parties-HDFC Bank that the parties are heading towards compromise in the matter and on submission of indemnity bond, account will be opened and then the complainant will be able to operate it. On 20.01.2022, following order was passed by the District Commission:-

 

“…….Dated :  20th January 2022

ORDER

Reply and evidence on behalf of OPs not filed. It has been stated by counsel for OPs that parties are heading towards compromise and complainant has been directed to file indemnity bond and thereafter account will be opened and then complainant will be able to operate it. Counsel for complainant seeks time to ask from the complainant with regard to compromise. Granted. Put up on 01.02.2022…..”

 

5.           Thereafter, the District Commission vide order dated 01.02.2022, directed the HDFC Bank to de-freeze the account of the complainant and the matter was adjourned to 08.02.2022. Relevant part of the order dated 01.02.2022 is reproduced hereunder:-

 

Dated :  1st February 2022

ORDER

Counsel for complainant has stated that indemnity bond has been submitted to the OP bank but account has not been de-freezed. OPs are directed to de-freeze the account failing which Manager of OP bank shall appear on next date of hearing. Put up on 08.02.2022.

 

6.           Bare perusal of the record reveals that the aforesaid orders dated 20.01.2022 and 01.02.2022 have not been challenged by the HDFC Bank and as such, the same have attained finality.

                   However, when the account of the complainant was not still defreezed by the HDFC Bank, again on 08.02.2022, following order was passed by the District Commission, which was also not challenged by the opposite parties and the said order dated 08.02.2022 has also attained finality:-

 

Dated :  8th February 2022

ORDER

Sh.Nitin Thatai, Counsel for OPs alongwith Sh.Rachin Kansal, Branch Manager of OP No.1 Bank physically present. Short reply alongwith evidence on behalf of OPs have been filed. Counsel for OPs is directed to supply copy thereof to the counsel for complainant.      It has been agreed between the parties that the authorized person of complainant, who has to operate the account, shall visit the OP bank tomorrow for the purpose of completion of documents/signatures and thereafter account will be defreezed. Put up for further proceedings on 15.02.2022.

 

7.           Thus, a bare perusal of order dated 08.02.2022 makes it very clear that it was agreed to between the parties that the authorized person of complainant, who has to operate the account shall visit the HDFC bank on 09.02.2022 for the purpose of completion of documents/signatures and thereafter account will be defreezed, which was not done by the HDFC Bank. Therefore, impugned order dated 15.02.2022 was passed by the District Commission as under:-

Dated :  15th February 2022

Rejoinder/replication on behalf of complainant have been received through drop box. Copy be given to the counsel for OPs.      Counsel for complainant has stated that OPs have not defreezed the bank account even after completing all documents and indemnity bond. Copy of documents have been filed alongwith rejoinder. We have perused the zimni order dated 20.01.2022 on which date it was stated by counsel for OPs that parties are heading towards compromise and complainant has been directed to file indemnity bond and thereafter account will be opened and then complainant will be able to operate it. Despite that, OPs have failed to defreeze the bank account. The OPs are directed to defreeze the bank account in question within seven days from today i.e. 15.02.2022. If the account is not defreezed within seven days, then OPs shall pay Rs.1000/- penalty per day to the complainant.       Put up for filing further evidence, if any by any of the parties and written as well as oral arguments on 15.03.2022.

 

8.           The aforesaid order dated 15.02.2022 has been challenged in this Revision Petition by the HDFC Bank.
9.           We have heard the contesting parties and have gone through the grounds of revision petition and also the material available on record, very carefully.
10.           It may be stated here that this Revision Petition has been filed against the interim order dated 15.02.2022 passed in the consumer complaint, which is pending before the District Commission on 15.03.2022 for written as well as oral arguments of the parties i.e. for final decision. Therefore, this Commission will refrain to comment upon the merits of the case, so that no prejudice is caused to any of the parties.

                   However, undisputedly, the amount of Rs.93,26,056/- has been deposited in one account and Rs.1,83,482/- in the second bank account with the HDFC Bank and the said amounts lying deposited in both these accounts are exclusively the property of the St. Thomas School-respondent and it has no concern, whatsoever, with the St.Thomas Educational Society, District Yamunanagar, Haryana. It is also not in dispute that the accounts were opened with the HDFC Bank by the then Officers of the St. Thomas School-complainant.

                   In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the interim order dated 15.02.2022 passed by the District Commission, which has been challenged in this Revision Petition  does not suffer from any illegally and perversity and as such does not call for any interference of this Commission. Consequently, the order dated 15.02.2022 stands affirmed. However, this order is subject to the final outcome of the consumer complaint bearing no.618 of 2021 which is pending before the District Commission.

11.           Consequently, this Revision Petition stands dismissed with no order as to cost. Resultantly, miscellaneous application bearing no.183 of 2022 also stands dismissed, having been rendered infructuous. However, we direct the District Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh to decide the consumer complaint bearing no.618 of 2021 on the date already fixed for final hearing i.e. 15.03.2022 and in any case, within a period of three weeks from today.

 

12.           Certified Copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. Record of the District Commission be sent back immediately.
13.           The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

Pronounced

10.03.2022

 

Sd/-

[JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

 

 

Sd/-

(PADMA PANDEY)

          MEMBER

 

Sd/-

 (RAJESH K. ARYA)

MEMBER

 Rg.