STANDARD CHARTERED BANK Vs. LAKHWINDER SINGH
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK
Click here to view full judgement.
S.M.KANTIKAR, PRESIDING MEMBER, J. -
(1.) The Revision Petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the Order dated 31.08.2017 of the State Commission, whereby the appeal filed by the Opposite Party - Standard Chartered Bank was dismissed in limine and the Order dated 07.06.2017 of the District Forum, allowing the Complaint, was affirmed.
(2.) The Petitioner was the Opposite Party (OP) and the Respondent was the Complainant in the Complaint and they are being accordingly referred to hereinafter.
(3.) Brief facts, shorn of unnecessary detail, are that the Complainant and his wife were the joint holders of an FDR issued on 06.05.1997 for Rs. 50,000/- by the OP - Bank. It was issued on the basis of a Reinvestment Deposit Plan. The initial date of maturity was 06.05.1999. The Complainant approached the OP - Bank for encashment of the amount in the year 2016; the OP - Bank refused.
The Complainant's case was that under the Reinvestment Deposit Plan of the OP - Bank the FDR was to get reinvested automatically till instructions were given by the account holder either to get the same encashed prematurely or to get the status of the same changed. The Complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of OP - Bank and filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Forum on 15.09.2016 for payment of the maturity amount along with compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony and Rs. 22,000/- as costs.
The OP - Bank's contention was that the scheme of 2 in 1 reinvestment deposit is such that the savings account and the deposit account are linked. In the event of any shortfall in the savings account to meet any withdrawal the required sum is uplifted from the linked deposit account and credited to the savings account to make good the shortfall. According to the minimum balance clause and for the maintenance of savings account a minimum balance of Rs. 10,000/- is necessary to be maintained to avoid any deduction from the FDR account. The OP - bank has followed the said procedure and continued uplifting the required amount from the linked fixed deposit to make good the shortfall in minimum deposit in the savings account. The Complainant never approached the OP - Bank on the initial date of maturity i.e. 06.05.1999 and came in 2016. As per the Bank's archival report dated 14.10.1998 the FDR in question revealed account balance as 'Nil' and subsequently the account was marked for deletion. There was a delay of approximately 18 years in filing of the Complaint. According to the provisions of the Banking Companies (Period of Preservation of Records) Rules, 1985 a bank is required to preserve the records relating to a period not less than 8 years immediately preceding the current calendar year. The OP - Bank has never acted in a deficient manner. ;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.