MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD. Vs. SHAJI
LAWS(KERCDRC)-2009-3-5
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on March 13,2009

Manager, Icici Bank Ltd. Appellant
VERSUS
SHAJI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.K.ABDULLA SONA, MEMBER - (1.)This appeal preferred from the order passed by CDRF, Kollam in the file of OP No. 409 of 2005 dated 30.11.2006. The opposite parties are the appellant who prefer this appeal from the order passed by the forum below.
(2.)The brief of the case is that the complainant is an account holder of the opposite parties and he sent a declaration stating that his account was closed on 28.6.2004 and no amount is due to the opposite parties from the complainant and for compensation and cost due to the dissatisfactory service from the opposite parties. The complainant had made an application closing his abovementioned account (Account No. 626605007732) and he had withdrawn Rs. 1,35,384.45. At the time of closure the complainant was having a balance amount of Rs. 1,35,637.45. This time the opposite party had debited Rs. 250 as closing charge from the balance amount of Rs. 1,35,637.45 and the complainant had withdrawn the amount of Rs. 1,35,387.45 after debiting the closing charge. On 25.6.2004 on closure of the account he returned all the balance cheques ATM card and other records. After closing the accounts the complainant does not have any type of transaction with the opposite parties. But the opposite parties sent a summary of account on 1.4.2005 to the complainant stating that there is a balance debit of Rs. 53,534.76 due to the opposite parties. Thereafter the complainant had received another summary of account dated 1.5.2005 issued by the opposite parties stating that there is a balance amount of Rs. 62,728.76 due to the opposite parties. On receipt of the said summary the complainant had issued a letter dated 10.5.2005 to the 1st opposite party about the true facts. The complainant had again received another summery of account dated 1.7.2005 issued by the opposite parties stating that Rs. 62,837.86 is due to the opposite parties from the complainant. On 30.7.2005 the complainant had sent a registered letter to the 2nd opposite parties stating that the complainants account was closed on 28.6.2004 and requested the 2nd opposite party to take up this matter immediately. The 2nd opposite party received the above registered letter on 22.7.2005, but he has not sent any reply. The complainant had received another summery of account dated 1.10.2005 stating that there is a balance of Rs. 68,442.86 due to the opposite parties from the complainant. It is clear that the opposite parties are trying to grab money from the complainant by making falsification in a closed account. On 10.1.2005 the complainant sent a notice through his lawyer calling upon the opposite parties to send a declaration stating that the complainants account was closed on 28.6.2004 and no amount is due to the opposite parties. Though they received the notice, they have not sent any reply or declaration. Hence this complaint.
(3.)The opposite parties entered appearance and filed very detailed written version before the forum below and contended that the complainant is not a consumer and the complaint does not constitute a consumer dispute. The complainant has not availed of any service for consideration with respect to the subject matter of the complainant from the opposite parties. It is admitted that the complainant opened on account of Rs. 5,00,000 on 24.7.2003 with the 1st opposite party bank. The complainant issued an account closure letter on 28.6.2004 to the 1st complainant issued an account closure letter on 28.6.2004 but since the said account was in debit balance since the service charges of Rs. 3, 24,439.16 for the months of April, 2004, May 2004 and till 28th June, 2004 were not paid by the complainant the account was not closed. The complainant has availed of various services from the opposite parties for which he has to pay the above charges. Therefore, these amounts were recoverable from the complainant. Having failed to make these payments there was a debit balance in the account. The 1st opposite party informed the complainant of the outstanding of Rs. 21,099.16 in the said account vide letter dated 28.10.2006. The complainant is fully aware that there is an outstanding in the said account since the 1st opposite party has been consistently forwarding the bank account statements. The complainant is now trying to absolve himself of the liability of making such payments legally due to the opposites parties by feigning innocence of such an outstanding. On 10.5.2005 and 16.7.2005 the complainant requested the opposite parties to close the account, again it was conveyed to the complainant that since the account is in debit balance it cannot be closed. An amount of Rs. 250 was only the account closing charges. The complainant is still liable to pay the service charges as stated above. The opposite parties have promptly replied to the complainants queries and sent him repeated reminders of the outstanding. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence prays for the dismissal of the complaint. The points that arise for consideration in the forum below are:
(1) Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?

(2) Relief and costs?



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.