KIDS CAMP vs BANK OF BARODA

-THESE two appeals arising out of the order dated 7.1.2002 of District Consumer Forum, Kanpur Nagar is a specimen where simple and honest consumer has been put to unnecessary harassment though there is ample evidence on the record to indicate that the bank, a nationalised one, had on several occasions been guilty of deficiency of service.

SRI Jai Kishan Basandani obtained a loan on 10.10.1988 of Rs. 2,00,000/- on cash credit basis. This account came to be closed by the Bank in December, 1994. The correspondence between the complainant and the Bank which is admitted to the parties and available on the record indicates that the complainant Sri Jai Kishan Basandani indicated in his correspondence that the Bank of Baroda, Civil Lines Branch, Kanpur had illegally deducted Rs. 4,990/- as guarantee fees from his account which according to the complainant was contrary to the circular of Reserve Bank of India dated 29.4.1993. The correspondence further reveals that the Bank had charged Rs. 8,232/- as excess interest which was revealed to the complainant through the account chart maintained by the Bank. The complainant demanded these amounts back but all his request fell into the deaf ears.

The complainant thus approached the Lok Pal @ Ombudsman, Kanpur. On hearing the matter on 18.2.1997 treating the grievances of the complainant as Complaint No. 76 dated 5.8.1996, Ombudsman recorded the following findings in paragraphs 01 and 04 of the award which are quoted below for ready reference: "01. The bank''s representative submitted that after re-examination and rechecking of the complainant account for all the years involved, they have found that due to variation in interest rates charged, the complainant is entitled to a relief of Rs. 8,232/-, which they will allow. 04. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be just and fair if the bank besides the above amount decides to waive the penal interest charged against the complainant. I recommend accordingly."

THE Bank did not pay the amount compelling the complainant Sri Jai Kishan Basandani to go to the District Forum with Complaint Case No. 437/1997. After considering the materials produced through the affidavits and annexures thereto, the District Forum came to the conclusion that the Bank had faltered in deficiency of service with regard to charging of guarantee fees and, therefore, directed the said amount to be refunded with 12% interest. It also directed payment of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant. THE District Forum, therefore, did not find favour with the complainant''s further plea that excess interest amount deducted should be refunded to him. In view of the partial success of the complainant, he has filed Appeal No. 314/2002. The Bank also felt loosing the matter partially, therefore, it has filed the Appeal No. 356/2002. Both have been connected and heard together.

MR. Jai Kishan Basandani has argued the matter himself. He is unwell even today. MR. Abdul Moin, learned Counsel has been heard at length on behalf of the Bank. The entire record has been perused. There was a sincere attempt on the part of Mr. Moin to convince that guarantee fee was payable by the complainant and, therefore, the District Forum has erred in decreeing the refund of that amount by the Bank to the complainant with 12% interest. In this connection, he relied upon a Circular of Reserve Bank of India reference of which has been made above. A copy of the circular is available on the record. It is unambiguous direction to all the banks not to charge guarantee fee where interest rate is above 15%. On examining the interest chart which was directed to be filed by an order of the Commission dated 16.12.2002, the complainant has paid interest rate beyond 17%. Consequently the argument of Mr. Moin that guarantee fee was payable by the complainant has no legs to stand and the deduction of that amount from the complainant''s account was erroneous in view of the factual position. To that extent, the judgment of the District Forum is perfectly valid insofar as the principal amount is concerned. Coming now to the grievance of the complainant that excess interest has been charged, reliance has been placed upon the observations made candidly in the award of Ombudsman which has been quoted above. There is no doubt that Rs. 8,232/- has been wrongly deducted in excess of the interest amount actually payable by the complainant, therefore, there is no doubt that the District Forum has erred in not decreeing the said amount against the Bank and in favour of the complainant. To that extent, therefore, the District Forum has erred.

THE complainant then urged that the rate of interest awarded by the District Forum in the instant case should have been atleast 18% because that is the rate of interest which the Bank has charged from the complainant. THE interest chart has been filed by the Bank which indicates that the interest rate has varied between 15% and 17% plus. In the interest of justice, interest @ 15% from the date of deduction till the date of payment shall be the rate which the complainant is entitled to get from the Bank. He is also entitled to get costs which are assessed at Rs. 1,000/- for the District Forum and Rs. 1,000/- for the commission totalling Rs. 2,000/-. THE compensation amount of Rs. 10,000/- is devoid of any justification and is set aside. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the complainant''s appeal succeeds while that of the bank should succeed in part and both the appeals are disposed of with the following directions: (1) THE amount of Rs. 4,990/- and the amount of Rs. 8,232/- shall be paid by the Bank within two months from today to the complainant in cash or by bank draft in his name. (2) THE Bank will pay 15% interest on both the amounts calculated from the day of deduction till the date the payment is made by cash or through Bank draft. (3) THE Bank will pay Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the complainant to be added to the amount to be paid in cash or by Bank draft as referred to above Rs. 10,000/- as compensation has not to be paid.

LET original copy of this order be kept in Appeal File No. A/314/SC/2002 and a certified copy of this order be placed in Appeal File No. A/356/SC/2002 which shall also be governed by this order. Let copy of this order be furnished to the parties Counsel within two weeks as per rules. Ordered accordingly.