Presented by:
Minakshi Chakraborty, Presiding Member.
Brief facts of the case:
This case is filed U/s. 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant on the ground that at the time of ATM transaction on…. it was reflected in the mini transaction slip that an amount of Rs.354/- in three spells of Rs.118/- each has been realized from the account and on 07.04.2018 a letter was sent to the Chief Manager, Canara Bank, Serampore Branch seeking reasons of deduction of amount direct from the bank account without taking any discharge from the account holder. Though the letter dated 07.04.2018 was received by the bank on 10.04.2019 but was unanswered. When more than one month elapsed, the complainant sent another letter dated 23.05.2018 allaying some queries which the bank received on 25.05.2018 but the bank did not take any step regarding the complaint. When such effort on the part of the complainant failed to elicit any result, the complainant had to refer the dispute to the Department of consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices alongwith all documents. The Department vide their Memo no. 19/1 (I)/CA & FBP/HLY dated.09.01.2019 sent notice to the bank to appear in the mediation on 24.1.2019. The bank failed to appear in the mediation meeting arranged by the Department on two consecutive days of 24.1.2019 & 12.3.2019. The Department in turn has advised the complainant to file the complainant before the Hon’ble forum to redress the grievance and settle and dispute.
Complainant filed the complaint petition praying direction upon the opposite party the credit of amount to the S/B A/C from where it was debited alongwith accrued interest and to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000/-for causing mental strain and inflicting agony and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- for cost of present proceedings.
Defense Case:- The opposite party contests the case by filing written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations leveled against him and states that the petitioner is a long time account holder of the bank and the relationship with the bank is very good& smooth. Therefore after receiving the letter on 07.4.2018 the manager of the said bank told verbally to the petitioner for seeking deduction of amount deducted from his bank account and the reason was well satisfactory to the petitioner and as such the said manager did not reply of the said letter in writing and this op submits that the administrating wing department deducted the amount on three occasions mentioned in the petition for reasons based known to said authority and this OP cannot say what for the deduction were made. The OP further submits that the complainant made 5 ECS mandate for various account and as per circular, the bank deducted the said amount from his account for maintenance & service charge. The OP also prays for dismissal of the complaint with cost.
Evidence on record
The complainant filed evidence on affidavit which is nothing but replica of complaint petition and supports the averments of the complainant in the complaint petition and denial of the written version of the opposite party.
The O.P has filed evidence on affidavit which reiterates the averments of the written version.
Argument highlighted by the ld. Lawyers of the parties
Complainant has filed written notes of argument. As per BNA the evidence on affidavit and written notes of argument of complainant shall have to be taken into consideration for disposal of the instant proceeding.
OP side also submitted their BNA and some documents and argued their case.
Heard argument. In course of argument ld. Lawyer of both sides have given emphasis on evidence and documents produced by the complainant.
From the discussion hereinabove, we find the following issues/points for consideration.
Issues/points for consideration
- Whether the complainant is the consumer?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the case?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief?
DECISION WITH REASONS
Issue no.1:
In the light of the discussion hereinabove and from the materials on record, it transpires that the complainant is a Consumer as provided by the spirit of Section 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.The point is thus answered in the affirmative.
Issue no.2:
Both the complainants and the opposite parties are residents/having their office addresses within the district of Hooghly and the claims do not exceed the pecuniary limit of this commission. This point is thus disposed of accordingly.
Issue nos. 3 & 4:
Both the issues are taken up simultaneously for the sake of convenience.
In this case Rs. 354/ has been deducted from the bank account of the present complainant in three spells of Rs. 118/on 27/3/18 and in the “particulars” column it has been written as ‘ECS MANDATE REG CHARGES’ (ANNEXURE A p2) for which various attempts were made by the present complainant to know the grounds on the basis of which the purported ECS mandate charges have been deducted repeatedly, but no satisfying answer was ever received from the bank for which the complainant has to knock the door of this commission. In reply to the complaint the OP filed their written version and to substantiate their case the OP has also annexed some relevant documents stand in the name of Debasis chakraborty ,the present petitioner here, which are mainly the ECS mandate maintenance and the bank has also filed the details statement of account of the present complainant wherefrom it appears that at page 26 of the bank statements ECS mandate registration charges to the tune of Rs. 118/ For three times on 27/03/18 has been deducted. The Bank authority has also submitted one copy of notice by Canara bank with regard to existing and revised charges w.e.f 1/7/17 where in the synopsis it has been written as consequent to migration of ECS mandates from ECS platform of RBI to NACH platform of NPCI, registration of the mandates is being centrally handled by clearing Section Mumbai. In the old RBI ECS system respective base branches used to authorize the mandates and collects appropriate service charges for registration/ operation by mandates. In the present system mandate management is centrally handled by clearing Section Mumbai. Further the system is not supporting auto debit of service charges towards registration/ operation by mandates. Hence clearing Section Mumbai, being the nodal office for mandate management, has been entrusted with the responsibility of collecting appropriate service charges as per the extant guide lines on service charges issued by profit planning section, SP&D owing head office, till such time the system is enabled for auto debit charges. Accordingly clearing Section Mumbai is collecting service charges for ECS mandates. Of late we are receiving many complaints from customers of debit of mandate registration charges. Branches are advised to educate the customer regarding charges applicable for ECS mandates. In this respect branches/ offices are advised to refer the following latest guide lines on service charges or operation by power of attorney/ mandates. HO circular no. 261/2017 dt. 24.5.2017 and point no. 5 page no. 2 of the annexure to the circular. Banks website WWW.Canarabank.Com>service charged and his > point no. 25. In the above backdrop, branches/ offices are advised to ensure compliance of the following: 1. Clearing Section Mumbai shall continue to ensure collection of service charges for registration / operation by ECS mandate till such time system if enabled for auto debit of mandate management service charges. 2. The respective branches/ service units/ controlling offices shall educate the customers about the service charges and ensure prompt redressal of grievances if any. So The bank authority has correctly deducted the ECS mandate charges.
Both the issues are thus disposed of.
Hence,
ordered
that the complaint case no. 169 of 2019 be and the same is dismissed on contest with no order s to cost.
Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary post for information and necessary action.
The Final Order will be available in the following website www.confonet.nic.in.
