The main legal point established in the judgment is that a bank may not be liable for unauthorized withdrawals from a joint account after being informed of the account holder's death, if the withdrawals were due to the negligence of the account holder himself. Additionally, a deviation from the daily withdrawal limit may not amount to wilful deficiency in service by the bank.

Mr. D. Karforma, Member—This is an appeal against the order of the Forum dated 31.1.2000 passed by the District Forum at Barasat. The facts of the matter are briefly stated below :

2. One Shri Amarnath Saha, father of appellant No. 1 (complainant No. 2) had a Savings Bank Account with ANZ Grindlays Bank, Salt Lake Branch. Initially, the account was in the single name of Shri Amarnath Saha, but later on 16.1.1998 it was converted into a joint account with appellant No. 1 as joint holder, with the mandate for operation as “either or survivor”. Additionally, Shri Saha had an ATM Card in his name only for accessing the S.B. Account. Shri Saha suddenly died on 21.10.1998 and thereafter the appellant No. 2 advised the Bank on 29.12.1998 about the death of Shri Saha and also asked the Bank to stop payment from the account. However, subsequently, when the Bank furnished the statement of accounts it was found that between 22.12.1998 and 6.1.1999 there were withdrawals from the account through ATM resulting in an overdraft of Rs. 12,453/-. The complainants alleged deficiency of service on the part of the Bank inasmuch as the drawals after the death of Shri Saha were unauthorised and unwarranted. Some correspondences followed. But as the matter was not settled, the complainants approached the Forum for recovery of the loss of Rs. 53,200/- with interest and compensation of Rs. 5,000/-.

According to the Bank’s version Shri Saha was obliged to keep his ATM Card in his personal safe custody without disclosing the PIN to anybody including the joint holder. Further from the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant on 15.2.1999 against the driver of Shri Saha it transpired that the said driver used to operate the said ATM Card for withdrawal of money from the account. In view of this the Bank contended that Shri Saha himself had violated the condition of the card by allowing the driver to use the ATM Card together with the PIN. It was the Bank’s stand that the unauthorised withdrawals took place owing to breach of condition by the holder of the ATM Card and hence the Bank was not liable for the unauthorised withdrawals.

3. On hearing the parties and also taking into account the deposition of witnesses both on behalf of the complainant and the O.P. the Forum came to the conclusion that after the Bank was informed about the death of Shri Saha they should have taken necessary steps to stop the operation of the ATM by using the ATM Card of Shri Saha. However, the Forum accepted the Bank’s contention that the withdrawals effected between the death of Shri Saha and the receipt of notice by the Bank about the death were on account of the negligence on the part of card-holder himself inasmuch as he used to allow his driver to withdraw money by using his (card holder’s) ATM Card and PIN. On this basis the Forum concluded deficiency in service on the part of the Bank for the withdrawals after the notice of death of Shri Saha was served on the Bank. But the Forum also held that for other withdrawals before the notice but after the death of Shri Saha were due to the negligence of Shri Saha himself and the Bank was in no way responsible for the same. On this basis the Forum ordered that the unauthorised withdrawals together with interest that took place after the notice should be recredited to the account standing in the name of Shri Saha’s daughter i.e. appellant No. 1. Further a compensation of Rs. 1,500/- was allowed.

4. The appellants have come in appeal against the above order. The Bank has not filed any appeal and it is understood that they have already complied with the order of the Forum. In the memo of appeal the main grounds taken by the appellant are :

(1) In case of joint account holders both holders are required to jointly apply and sign the application for ATM Card. This was not done in the present matter and the ATM Card was issued only in the same of Shri A.N. Saha.

(2) From the statement of accounts received from the Bank it was found that there was