STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD Vs. EUNICE L CHAWNGTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Revision Petition under Sec. 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short "the Act") is to the order dated 26.08.2016 in First Appeal No. 268 of 2014 against CC No.683 of 2013, passed by the Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (for short "the State Commission"). By the impugned order, the State Commission has concurred with the finding of deficiency of service on behalf of the Opposite Parties and enhanced the compensation awarded by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Hyderabad (for short "the District Forum").

(2.) The facts in brief are that the Complainant is a customer and account holder of State Bank of Hyderabad - NRI Branch bearing Account No. 62121509394 since Jan. 2010 and she has made certain deposits in FDRs and the first Opposite Party did not furnish the certificates to her despite the fact that she had approached the Bank three times. It was averred that the Complainant approached the second Opposite Party and she was asked to show her PAN card though it was not necessary to collect the deposit certificates and therefore gave TDS forms not the original savings certificate. On perusal, she found that the Bank had deducted 10% tax from her account though she had submitted form 15H declaring that she had no income. It was stated that she was deliberately denied her original deposit certificates. The Complainant dropped the TDS papers on the desk of the first Opposite Party and thereafter the first Opposite Party threatened to get her arrested. Immediately she had dropped the Complaint in the Complaint box and made the same to the third Opposite Party. When the third Opposite Party was contacted she was once again informed that she had to collect the deducted income tax amount from the Income Tax Department. It was averred that keeping the original deposit certificates with the Opposite Parties deliberately for several months amounts to deficiency in service. It was further stated that the deposited amount was not updated every time there was increase in the interest rate inspite of her having visited the Bank regularly. The Complainant had received Canadian dollars of 1100 in September 2013 and this amount was not converted into Indian Rupees on account of which the value went down and the Complainant suffered loss of Rs.50,000.00. The Complainant approached the District Forum seeking the following reliefs:

(3.) The Opposite Parties No.1 and 2 filed their Written Version which was adopted by Opposite Parties no.3 and 4. It was admitted that the Complainant held subject Savings Bank Account and that the said amounts were deposited in her Account. It was averred that the Complainant had failed to submit form 15G or 15H as required every year in the month of April and May to get tax exemption from tax deduction. It was denied that any discrimination was shown against the Complainant. It was averred that the Complainant visited their bank on 23.05.2013 for conversion of FDR. for higher rate of interest and at that point of time TDS was deducted and TDS forms were given to the Complainant. On verification of the said papers, she has thrown away her TDS papers on desk and shouted in a loud voice at Opposite Parties despite the assurance given by the Opposite Parties that they would verify records regarding deduction of income tax. While so, on 20.09.2013 a request was made to the Complainant to give her consent for converting the inward remittance of CAD 10354 and also requested through another letter dated 1.10.2013 sent through RPAD, the Complainant did not respond. Hence, the Opposite Party converted CAD to Indian Rupees on 07.10.2013 and credited the same to her Account and therefore no deficiency of service on their part.