Order by:
Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu, President
1. This Consumer Complaint has been received by transfer vide order dated 26.11.2021 of Hon’ble President, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab at Chandigarh under section 48 of CPA Act, vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2021 from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana to District Consumer Commission, Moga to decide the same in Camp Court at Ludhiana and said order was ordered to be affected from 14th March, 2022.
2. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (now section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019) on the allegations that he had opened a P.P.F Account in his name with opposite party no.2 bearing no.32223409911 on 07-03-2012. He had been depositing a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- approximately every year through cheque being dropped at the office of opposite party no.3, to claim the tax benefits under S.80-D of Income Tax Act. Further alleges that on 30-11-2016, the complainant had dropped a cheque bearing no.000610 dated 30.11.2016 for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Mata Rani Road Branch, Ludhiana for deposit of the amount in P.P.F Account with the opposite party no.3. The said cheque was cleared from the account of complainant in HDFC Bank on 02-12-2016, which was entered and clearly mentioned in the statement of Account of the complainant by the HDFC Bank. The complainant thought that the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- must have been deposited in the P.P.F Account of the complainant in his account with opposite party no.2. In the month of April 2016, the complainant went to the office of opposite party no.3 with intention to get the entries of interest etc completed in his passbook. The complainant was shocked to see that the entry regarding the deposit of Rs. 1,50,000/- was missing and was not entered in the passbook. The complainant then enquired from the Branch Manager and other officials of opposite party no.3 as to why the entry of Rs.1,50,000/-which was cleared on 0212-2016 by HDFC Bank, had not been entered in the passbook. The opposite party no.3 disclosed that the entry in the passbook of complainant was exceeding the financial year, as such they said cheque amount had not been credited by the system and showing a common error message for NON KYC compliance. That opposite party no.3 further told that they had tried to contact the complainant but complainant had not provided his phone number neither to the home branch nor to the opposite party no.3 to update his CIF details nor on his credit voucher and at last they had sent a registered letter at the last known address of complainant in his CIF detail i.e House no.615-B, Aggar Nagar, Ludhiana on 06-12-2016 along with his credit voucher for his ready reference and had transferred the amount to suspence a/c of the bank. The complainant told to the opposite party no.3 that since he had already sold the house bearing no.615-B, Aggar Nagar, Ludhiana and had shifted his residence to Barewal Road, Ludhiana in the year 2014, as such complainant could not receive the registered letter if any sent to complainant on his previous address. The opposite party no.3 showed a Banker's cheque dated 03-12-2016 for a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- bearing no.163906 in the name of complainant issued by opposite party no.3 and a letter dated 05-12-2016. The opposite party no.3 then handed over the original said Banker's cheque dated 0312.2016 for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- bearing no.163906 along with Photostat copies of letter dated 05-12-2015 and the dispatch register with registered postal receipt dated 06-12-2016 to the complainant. The complainant had received the said outdated Banker's Cheque from opposite party no.3 under protest as the payment was not deposited in his account. Even otherwise also the said Bankers' Cheque dated 03-12-2016 had no validity on 15-04-2017. The complainant had also got completed his KYC with the opposite party 0.3 showing his latest residential address on 15-04-2017. On 02-05-2017, complainant had written a personal letter to the opposite party no.3, which was received on 02-05-2017 by the receipt clerk of the opposite party no.3. Complainant had demanded a photocopy of the cheque deposit voucher. The said letter of complainant was replied by the opposite party no.3 vide letter dated 19-05-2017 bearing No.Br/2017-18/16 mentioning the same story which was narrated orally to complainant on 15-04-2017.That complainant then sent an application under Right to Information to the opposite party no.3 demanding the copy of cheque no.000610 dated 30-11-2016 deposited in PPF Account no.32223409911 (Front back), copy of voucher of deposit of cheque no. no.000610 dated 3011-2016 deposited in PPF Account no.32223409911 (Front back). The said application dated 02-06-2017 which was sent on 08-06-2017 by Speed Post was replied by the opposite party no.1 being the CPIO alleging that the copy of cheque no.000610 dated 30-11-2016 deposited in PPF Account no.32223409911 and cheque deposit voucher for cheque no.000610 dated 30-11-2016 had already been dispatched to complainant on 06-12-2016, whereas no copy of cheque no.000610 was sent. But the opposite party no.3 had not supplied the copy of cheque and voucher with front back to complainant. That complainant again sent an application dated 07-06-2017 under Right to Information to the opposite party no.2 demanding the copy of complete Account Opening Form of account no.32223409911 through Speed Post on 08-06-2017. The opposite party no.2 called complainant on his mobile phone and asked him to collect the required information/document on 05-07-2017. Complainant immediately after receiving the telephonic call reached the office of opposite party no.2 and received the documents consisting of a forwarding letter bearing no.MG/RTI/017-18/104 dated 05-07-2017, FORM-A i.e Application for opening Public Provident Fund Account and copy of nomination form which were also attested from the original forms. The complainant had also sent the complaints through email on the email Ids of S.B.I as mentioned on the notice boards. Complainant had also sent messages of "UN HAPPY" on mobile no.08008202020 on 24-05017, 25-05-2017, 02-06-2017 and 17-07-2017 from his mobile no.09814422163, but received no response from the email complaint, however message has been received in reply to the text messages. In the message received on 20-07-2017, it was mentioned "Your SMS arrived in SBI's Happy Room. Your satisfaction is our destination. We shall call you shortly to get details. Index no.809862". That from the entire facts narrated above it is clear that the mobile number of complainant i.e.09814422163 was already available with you as the same was mentioned in the handwriting of complainant on the account opening form while opening the account on 07-03-2012 and you opposite party no.3 had taken a lame excuse in the letter dated 19-052017 that you have tried to contact complainant but complainant had not provided his phone number neither to the home branch to update his CIF detail nor on his credit voucher. Secondly it was mentioned that Deposit exceeds financial year so you have issued a Banker's Cheque No.163906 for Rs.1.50 Lacs on 03-12-2016. It is worth mentioning here that the deposit had not exceeded the financial year, as it was the only first deposit for the financial year. Due to both the excuses complainant has suffered a lot and it clearly shows that you all are guilty of unfair trade practice on your part and deficiency in service. Since the Banker's Cheque issued dated 03-12-2016 was handed over to complainant on 15-04-2017 when the same had become outdated as such the same could not be encashed and the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- along with interest is liable to be paid by Opposite Party. Complainant has further suffered loss for the interest on the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- for the next 10 years. He had also suffered loss of rebate in Income Tax due to deficiency in your service. Complainant had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/-only on 05-04-2017 for the current financial year, which was deposited by Opposite Parties before the completion of KYC, which shows that there was no such problem in the system as alleged in letter dated 19-05-2017. That the complainant then got served a legal notice dated 24-072017 through Registered A/Ds upon the opposite parties calling upon them to pay the Principal amount of Rs.1,50,000/- along with interest @ 8% per annum w.e.f 01-12-2016 up to date, loss of rebate in Income Tax amounting to Rs.45,000/-being a person falling in category of 30%, as of Rs. 25,000/-only as compensation on account of deficiency in service. As such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
a) The Opposite Parties may be directed to pay the interest @ 8% per annum on the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- w.e.f. 01.12.2016 upto date, loss of rebate in income tax amounting to Rs.45,000/- being a person falling in category of 30%, a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.15,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and harassment and Rs.15,000/- as litigation or any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission may deem fit be also granted.
3. Opposite Parties initially appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has attempted to misguide and mislead this District Consumer Commission. It is submitted that the complainant had dropped cheque for Rs.1,50,000/- on 30.11.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank, Mata Rani Chowi, Ludhian at State Bank of India, Kesar Ganj Branch, Ludhiana to credit the same in PPF Account No. 32223409911 of the complainant. Said amount of the cheque received in the bank of the Opposite Parties and when the credit entry tried to be made in the account, the same was not credited and showing a reason i.e. error message that for non KYC compliance. Then the official of the Opposite Parties tried to contact the complainant at his address as well as on mobile No.98144-22163 which is available to the bank as noted in the record, but could not get the complainant since the complainant has shifted from the address recorded with the Opposite Parties ban and said phone number was not responding. The Opposite Parties bank had prepared a banker cheque bearing No. 163906 in the name of the complainant on 03.12.2016 for Rs.1,50,000/- and a letter has been posted to the complainant vide registered post for information. In this way, the Opposite Parties made its all efforts to contact to the complainant but it could not matured due to the reason that the complainant has left the address given to the bank and later the complainant did not update his residential address with the Opposite Parties. So, taking into consideration these facts, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. On merits, the Opposite Parties took up almost the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Parties and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C20 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.
5. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties also tendered into evidence the affidavit of Ex.RA alongwith copy of document Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 and close the evidence.
6. We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant, however, none has come present on behalf of the Opposite Parties and also gone through the documents placed on record.
7. Ld.counsel for the Complainants has mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and hence, we have perused the rival contention and facts narrated in the written version of the ld.counsel for the parties. The case of the complainant is that due to lapse on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant suffered loss which can not be compensated lateron and as such, the Opposite Parties be directed to pay the interest @ 8% per annum on the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- w.e.f. 01.12.2016 upto date, loss of rebate in income tax amounting to Rs.45,000/- being a person falling in category of 30%, a sum of Rs.25,000/- as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.15,000/- as compensation on account of mental tension and harassment and Rs.15,000/- as litigation. On the other hand, the defence of the Opposite Parties is that admittedly the complainant had dropped cheque for Rs.1,50,000/- on 30.11.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank, Mata Rani Chowi, Ludhian at State Bank of India, Kesar Ganj Branch, Ludhiana to credit the same in PPF Account No. 32223409911 of the complainant. Said amount of the cheque received in the bank of the Opposite Parties and when the credit entry tried to be made in the account, the same was not credited and showing a reason i.e. error message that for non KYC compliance. Then the official of the Opposite Parties tried to contact the complainant at his address as well as on mobile No.98144-22163 which is available to the bank as noted in the record, but could not get the complainant since the complainant has shifted from the address recorded with the Opposite Parties ban and said phone number was not responding. The Opposite Parties bank had prepared a banker cheque bearing No. 163906 in the name of the complainant on 03.12.2016 for Rs.1,50,000/- and a letter has been posted to the complainant vide registered post for information. In this way, the Opposite Parties made its all efforts to contact to the complainant but it could not matured due to the reason that the complainant has left the address given to the bank and later the complainant did not update his residential address with the Opposite Parties. To prove such facts, the Opposite Parties have placed on record the copy of the banker cheque Ex.R1 alongwith copy of despatched register Ex.R2 and also filed the reply of the copy of notice and these documents have nowhere rebutted or denied by the complainant by filing any any cogent or convincing evidence. Hence, we are of the view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant complaint stands dismissed. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost by District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana and thereafter, the file be consigned to record room after compliance.
9. Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.
This Consumer Complaint was originally filed at District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (Now Commission) at Ludhiana and it keep pending over there until Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab vide letter No.04/22/2021/4 C.P.A/38 dated 17.1.2022 has transferred the instant Consumer Complaint alongwith Other Complaints to District Consumer Commission, Moga with directions to work on this file onward from 14th March, 2022 and accordingly District Consumer Commission, Moga has decided the present complaint at Camp Court, Ludhiana, as early as possible as it could decide the same
Announced in Open Commission at Camp Court, Ludhiana.
