BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM ::

KADAPA Y.S.R DISTRICT

PRESENT SRI V.C. GUNNAIAH, B.Com., M.L., PRESIDENT

      SMT. K. SIREESHA, B.L., LADY MEMBER

                                                                               SRI M.V.R. SHARMA, MEMBER                                     

Tuesday, 5^th July 2016

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.  10/ 2016

P. Tirupal Reddy, S/o P. Lakshmi Reddy,

aged 66 years, Cultivator,

Residing of Mundlapalli village and post,

Chennur Mandal, Kadapa YSR District.                              ….. Complainant.  

Vs.   

1.  The Branch Manager, State bank of Hyderabad,

     Main Branch, 5/485, Trunk Road,

     Near Chennur Bus stand, Kadapa city, YSR District.

2.  The Asst. General Manager, Region-1,

     State Bank of Hyderabad, Regional Office,

     Hero Honda Show Room  Upstairs, Renigunta Road,

     Tirupati, Chittoor  District.                                             …..Respondents.

This complaint coming for final hearing on 29-6-2016 in the presence of Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for complainant and Sri S.S.D. Rama Swamy, Advocate for R1 and R2 remained exparte on 22-3-2016 and  upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

(Per V.C. Gunnaiah, President),

1.             The complainant filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 (for short herein after called as C.P. Act) praying this forum to direct the Respondents to pay maturity amount of term deposits deposited by late Karnati Subba Reddy, bearing Nos. 62077643689 & 62077643781 along with interest at 9.5% p.a. from the date of maturity till realization to the Complainant, and also to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for physical strain and mental agony and Rs. 3,000/- towards costs of the complaint. 

2.             The averments of the complaint in brevity are that one Karnati Subba Reddy resident of Ramanapalle Village, Chennur Mandal, Kadapa District made two term deposits with R1, TDR bearing Nos. 62077643689 for  Rs. 72,655/- and 62077643781 for Rs. 38,761/-.  Both for a term of two years from 8-10-2012  to 8-10-2014.  Initially one B. Venkata Subba Reddy was put as nominee for the said two term deposits and the deposit holder renewed both term deposits for another two years from 8-10-2014.  On the written instructions of the depositor Karnati Subba Reddy to the R1, the nomination to the above two deposits have been changed from the name of B. Venkata Subba Reddy to the name of Complainant w.e.f 11-6-2015.  The R1 effected required changes in nomination column and also mutated the changes in the registers of the bank and put seal for approval to the above effect and in all relevant papers as well as term deposit bonds.  Thus the Complainant has been duly figured as nominee of the above two term deposits as per due process to the knowledge of all concerned.  The original depositor died on 15-10-2015 without receiving the maturity amounts of two term deposits.  Consequently, the Complainant being the nominee of the said two term deposits and who is entitled to receive the same had approached the Respondents and requested for payment of maturity amount.  But his efforts proved futile.  There are no legal heirs to the original depositor. His wife was pre-deceased him and have no children.  Though, the records show that the Complainant is the nominee, the Respondents have been adopting dilatory tactics and prolonging the payment amount and thus caused mental agony and physical strain to the Complainant.  Thus there is deficiency in service on the part of the Respondents.  On 19-1-2015 the Complainant issued legal notice to the Respondent for payment of amount due under two term deposits.  The Respondent issued reply notice on 22-01-2016 with all false and untenable allegations.  Hence, the complaint for the above  reliefs.

3.             Respondent No. 2 remained exparte on 22-3-2015.

4.             Respondent No. 1 filed counter denying the allegations regarding deficiency in service liability to pay the amounts as claimed by the Complainant.  However, admitted Karnati Subba Reddy deposited TDR amounts on 8-10-2012 and renewed on 8-10-2014 under two term deposit receipts initially one  B. Venkata Subba Reddy, as his nominee as pleaded by the Complainant.

5.             It is further averred that the said K. Subba Reddy visited the R1 bank on 12-6-2015 and orally instructed the bank to change name of nominee and include the name of Complainant in place of B. Venakta Subba Reddy.  Then R1 bank officer changed name of nominee and necessary corrections were carried out in the original term deposit receipts.  The original depositor died on  15-10-2015 and after that the claimant has claimed maturity amount being the nominee.  It is also averred subsequent to the death of depositor Karnati Subba Reddy, the previous nominee B. Venkata Subba Reddy issued a legal notice on 2-2-2016 demanding this respondent not to disburse the amount and a suitable reply was given to him.  The Respondent bank informed to the higher authorities about the rival claims.  As per advice, the Branch Manger not made any payment either of the nominee since, there are rival claims.   Thus there is no deficiency in service on the part of this Respondent.  Therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

6.             On the basis of the above pleadings the following points are settled for determination. 

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondents as pleaded by the complainant?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed against the respondents as prayed?
3. To what relief?

7.             No oral evidence has been let in by the parties.  But on behalf of complainant  Exs. A1 to A6 and on behalf of the respondent No.1 Exs. B1 & B2 documents are marked.       

8.             Heard arguments on both sides and carefully perused the pleadings and documentary evidence placed by the parties.    

9.             Point Nos. 1 & 2. Learned counsel for Complainant contended that R1 bank admitted in its counter that the original depositor Karnati Subba Reddy changed name of nominee as P. Tirupal Reddy, Complainant herein in two term deposits on 12-6-2015 and necessary corrections were carried out in all records including original term deposit receipts.  Therefore, the objections by anybody cannot be entertained by the bank for receiving the amount on the death of original depositor.  But, R1 failed to pay the amount to the Complainant who is nominee under two term deposits, as such there is deficiency in service on the part of R1 and the complaint may be allowed as prayed for. 

10.            Per contra learned counsel for R1 contended that since the original nominee B. Venakata Subba Reddy issued notice not to disburse the amount to the Complainant, the same was stopped as per advice of higher authorities of the bank.  Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the R1.  Hence, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs as no deficiency in service on his part and complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

11.            It is admitted by the R1 bank that the original depositor Karnati Subba Reddy made two term deposits in TDR Nos. 62077643689 for                            Rs. 72,655/- & 62077643781 for Rs. 38,761/- from 8-10-2012 to 8-10-2014.  It is also admitted by R1 that initially one B. Venkata Subba Reddy, had been nominated as nominee of the depositor Karnati Subba Reddy. 

12.            It is the case of Complainant that subsequently, on 11-6-2015 the original depositor of the TDRs changed the nominee by inserting the name of Complainant and the R1 bank effected required changes in all the registers of the bank and mutated changes as per instructions of Karnati Subba Reddy the depositor and also mentioned the Complainant’s name as nominee in the term deposit bonds and original depositor died on 15-10-2015 without legal heirs as his wife pre-deceased him and no children to him.  Therefore, he is entitled to receive the term deposit amounts as nominee.  R1, who contested the matter also admitted in his counter that on 12-6-2015 the depositor Karnati Subba Reddy instructed the R1 bank to change nominee and as per his instructions the Respondent bank officer included the name of Complainant in the place of B. Venkata Subba Reddy.  Thus the depositor changed the name of nominee and necessary corrections were carried out on the original term deposit receipts.  So it is clear by contention of R1 bank that though originally the depositor has nominated one B. Venkata Subba Reddy, subsequently on 12-6-2015 on the instructions of the original depositor the nominee B. Venkata Subba Reddy name was deleted and in his place the Complainant name is nominated by the depositor as his nominee.  As per instructions of the original depositor all necessary changes in column of nominee was effected in all records of the bank including term deposit bonds.  Therefore, since the original depositor himself has changed name of nominee B. Venkata Subb Reddy and substituted with the name of Complainant the Complainant has become nominee of the original depositor of term deposits from 12-6-2015 onwards. Hence, neither B. Venkata Subba Reddy nor anybody can obstruct R1 bank to disburse the amount of TDRs to Complainant after the death of the original depositor.  Since, the Complainant is the nominee of the original depositor of two term deposit above mentioned and the deposit holder died on 15-10-2015 the Complainant who is nominee is entitled for receiving the amount due under two deposit deposits from R1 bank.  But R1 bank failed to pay the amounts to the Complainant though, he claimed the same on the pretext that one B. Venakta Subba Reddy issued legal notice not to disburse the amount.  The R1 bank cannot retain the amount with them stating that there was rival claim.  If at all there is any rival claim in between the nominee and the other party who claimed amount, it is the duty of the bank to disburse the amount on maturity to the nominee in the event of death of original depositor.  If any person has any claim over the amount claimed by the nominee, he would seek remedy by taking appropriate steps for recovery of his share whatsoever, from the nominee.  So it is not for the bank to retain the amount till dispute is over between the rival claimants.  Hence, R1 bank ought to have honoured the claim of Complainant herein and disbursed the amount to him who is the nominee of the original depositor of the above two TDRs, but failed to pay the amount.   Thus we see there is deficiency in service on the part of R1 bank, since the Complainant established he is nominee of the above two terms deposits and the original depositor died and no successors to him, we hold that the Complainant, who is nominee, is entitled for the amounts of two term deposits.  Accordingly, points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the Complainant and against the Respondents. 

13.            Point No. 3. In the result, the complaint is allowed, directing the Respondent No. 1 to pay maturity amount due on the term deposit Nos. 62077643689 & 62077643781 along with accrued interest to the Complainant, to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) for causing mental agony to the Complainant and shall also pay Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) towards costs of the Complaint to the Complainant, within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amounts due under the above two term deposits shall carry interest at 9.5% p.a. till realization. The complaint against Respondent No. 2 is dismissed without costs. 

          Dictated to the Stenographer, typed my dictation by Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, this the 5^th July 2016

MEMBER                                    MEMBER                                    PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses examined.

For Complainant:         NIL                                   For Respondents :     NIL

Exhibits marked for Complainant  : -  

Ex. A1       Term deposit dt. 21-3-2013 deposited in account bearing No. 62077643689 for Rs. 72,655/- for a term of 2 years i.e. from                    8-10-2012 to 8-10-2014.

Ex. A2       Term deposit dt. 21-3-2013 deposited in account bearing No. 62077643681 for Rs. 38,761/- for a term of 2 years i.e. from                      8-10-2012 to 8-10-2014.

Ex. A3       Original death certificate of late K. Subba Reddy issued by Municipal Corporation, Kadapa dt. 2-11-2015.

Ex. A4       Aadhar card of the Complainant.

Ex. A5       Legal notices dt. 19-1-2015 issued by the Complainant to the Respondents.

Ex. A6       Reply notice dt. 22-1-2015.

Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondent No.1: -        

Ex. B1       P/c of legal notice received by R1 dt. 2-2-2016 by G. Kishor Krishna, Advocate, Kadapa.

Ex. B2       O/c of reply legal notice dt. 4-2-2016.

Exhibits marked on behalf of the Respondent No.2: -        

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                            PRESIDENT

Copy to :-

1. Sri G. Trivikram Singh, Advocate for Complainant.
2. Sri S.S.D. Rama Swamy, Advocate for R1
3. The Asst. General Manager, Region-1, State Bank of Hyderabad, Regional Office, Hero Honda Show Room  Upstairs, Renigunta Road, Tirupati, Chittoor District

B.V.P.