STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. YASH PALL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 14.03.2012, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) in First Appeal No. 819/2008, "State Bank of India & Anr. Vs. Yash Pall Gupta" and First Appeal No. 1099/2008, "Yash Pall Gupta vs. State Bank of India & Anr.", vide which, both these appeals were ordered to be dismissed and the order dated 13.06.2008, passed by the District Forum, Ludhiana in Consumer Complaint No. 388/2007, allowing the said complaint, was upheld.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent Yash Pall Gupta who is stated to have retired as Managing Director from the Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as "LIC") deposited some money out of his service retirement benefits in a Scheme promulgated by the Government of India, known as 'Deposit Scheme for Retiring Government Employees, 1989'. The Scheme was being operated by the petitioner State Bank of India. Under the said scheme, any Government employee could have invested his retirement benefits within three months, with lock-in period of three years, after which the depositor was entitled to tax-free interest @8.5%. The complainant deposited a total sum of Rs. 8,80,000/- at various times during the year 2001 under the said Scheme and opted for cumulative deposit option. After completion of three years on 21.05.2004, the complainant consented to continue his account with the petitioner Bank for another three years, i.e., 21.05.2007. The interest on the amount deposited continued to be regularly credited to his account on 30th June and 31st December every year. The complainant also made withdrawals from his account and entries to this effect were made in the ledger etc. Further, following the death of his wife in April 2005, who was a joint account holder, he got the nomination done in favour of his son and the said change was registered in the account books of the petitioner Bank.

(3.) It has been alleged that as the account was to mature on 21.05.2007, the complainant approached the petitioner Bank on 09.05.2007 for calculation of principal and interest amount. However, he was astonished to find that the Bank refused to pay interest for the period 21.05.2004 to 20.05.2007, taking the plea that the said Scheme had been amended vide notification dated 13.08.2004 and hence, no interest was payable after 21.05.2004. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Bank, stating that the Bank never informed him about any change in the terms and conditions governing the scheme. He stated that he was entitled to be paid a sum of Rs. 12,06,991/- + interest from 01.01.2007 to 24.05.2007 as per entries made in the pass-book of his account, whereas he was paid only Rs. 10,42,677/- on 24.05.2007. He was, therefore, entitled to get Rs. 1,64,314/- + interest on Rs. 12,06,991/- from 01.01.2007 to 24.05.2007 and to get further interest @20% p.a. compounded six monthly from 24.05.2007 till realisation. In addition, he demanded a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation for mental agony and Rs. 25,000/- as litigation expenses. The complaint was resisted by the petitioner/OP by filing a written statement before the District Forum, in which they stated that the Government of India had issued a notification dated 13.08.2004 in which it had been stated that interest could not be paid on the deposits beyond 13.09.2004. There was no deficiency on the part of the Bank, therefore as they had acted in accordance with the instructions of the Government of India.