West Bengal

Dakshin Dinajpur

CC/15/2023

Mr. Mahidur Rahaman Sarkar, S/O- Faizuddin Sarkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Bandhan Bank, Makuli Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Debraj Chakraborty

31 Aug 2023

ORDER

The instant case has been initiated under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 claiming an amount of Rs.71,000 +  Rs.25,000/- towards compensation + Rs.25,000/- towards litigation cost  (Total amount = Rs. 1,21,000/-) with accruing interest till payment.

 The fact of the case, in brief, is that the complainant the is a bonafide consumer/customer of Opposite Party / Bank vide account No. 50200024662895, product type: SB Sanchary-2000 MAB. Since initiation of his trade and business, the complainant operates his business through the said bank account lying with the Opposite Party since the opening of the account and he also took loan from the Opposite Party. As per the baking Law and Ruses, it is duty of the bank to advice their bonafide customers about TDS collection, consequences of PAN, transaction etc. but alas, Opposite Party did not perform his duty. Subsequently, without any intimation to complainant, on 04.12.2020 Rs. 46,000/- and on 07.12.2020 Rs.25,000/- has been deducted as TDS by the O.P. and this is intentional negligence to serve the banking service from the end of Opposite Party. Due to the intentional negligence and deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice of Opposite Party concern ought to have suggested supply all documents properly to the complainant then complainant would not have suffered havoc financial loss. Legal notice was served upon the Opposite Party through Registered Post on 28.12.2022 stating all the fact therein which is received by the Opposite Party on 30.12.2022 but the Opposite Party is being  very reluctantly left away and avoided this very serious matter.  Having no alternative, the Complainant filed this case for relief as prayed for.

 

          Notice was issued upon the Opposite Party and in spite of receiving the notice the opposite party did not appear before this Commission so, the case is proceeded ex-parte against him.           

 

       In support of his case, the complainant has filed the photo copies of the following document-

1. Receipt of Trade Registration fee of the Complainant
2. Aadhar Card of the Complainant
3. Statement of account of the Complainant being A/C no.50200024662895
4. Legal Notice sent to Opposite Party

 

                                                 REASONED DICISION

           We have heard argument by Ld. Advocates for the Complainant at length.  Perused  the materials on record, evidence on affidavit and written argument filed by the Complainant. We have also gone through the documents produced before us by the Complainant.

           At the time of argument, Ld. Advocate for the Complainant narrated the fact of the case as mentioned in the complaint petition. Ld. Advocate further submitted that PAN has not been attached with the A/C of the Complainant. The Opposite has not supplied F-16.The TDS has been deducted @20% in spite of 2% if the transfer is excess Rs.20,00,000/-. The Complainant has proved his case so, he is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

             Now, on perusal of the statement of account of the Complainant being A/C no.50200024695886, it appears that on 04.12.2020 a sum of Rs.46,000/- has been deducted as TDS and on 07.12.2020 a sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been deducted as TDS.

              It is the contention of the Complainant that above mentioned amount has been deducted as TDS without informing the Complainant or without receiving proper documents of the income of the Complainant. The Opposite Party has whimsically, intentionally and negligently deducted the huge amount instead if requisite amount. Thus, it appears deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party. 

             The above mentioned contention of the Complainant is not

disbelievable because the Opposite Party in spite of receiving notice he did not appear before this Commission to contest the case. In other words, it can be said that the Opposite Party has not challenged the allegation of the Complainant. So, we opine that the Complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for.

             In view of the above mentioned findings, this commission is of opinion that the Complainant is a consumer to the Opposite Party and there is negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party so, the Complainant is entitled to get relief.   

          Hence, it is

                                                                                    O R D E R E D

 

                        That the complaint case No. 15 of 2023 be and the same is allowed ex-parte in part against the Opposite Party but with cost. 

                        The Opposite Party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.46,000/- + Rs.25,000/- = Rs. 71,000/- together with an interest @ 8% p.a. from 24.02.2023( the date of filing claim) till full realization by issuing an account payee cheque in favour of the Complainant within 45 days from the date of passing of this order failing which the Complainant is at liberty to execute the order as per law. The Opposite Party is further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation and Rs.5.000/-towards litigation cost within the above mentioned period.

                        Let a plain copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.