JUDGMENT

Raj Shekhar Attri, President.—The opposite parties-HDFC Bank have impugned the interim order dated 15.02.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short the District Commission), vide which the HDFC Bank was directed to defreeze the bank account of the complainant- St. Thomas School (respondent before this Commission) within seven days from 15.02.2022, failing which, they were directed to pay Rs.1000/- per day as penalty to the complainant.

2. The facts which are necessary for disposal of this case are that on 26.08.2015, Bank Account bearing Account No. 5010011-7060303 ID No. 6398161 was opened in the name of “St. Thomas School Jagadhri” with the opposite parties-HDFC Bank, under Signatures and Representation of Dr. A. D. Lyall (then Secretary/ Treasurer); Mr. Suresh Martin Chauhan (then Manager); Mr. Noel Surandre Dass (Administrative Officer); and Mr. James Prashar of complainant school. It is the case of the complainant that the HDFC Bank failed to close the said account, despite making requests to it. Following pleas have been taken by the complainant in its complaint in para no.8 to 11 as under:-

“That thereafter the complainant school approached OP’s for closure of said bank account vide Request Letter dated 30.02.2018, which was duly received by OP’s. The copy of Request Letter dated 03.02.2018 is annexed herewith as Exhibit C-7.

9. That thereafter, various meetings were held between representatives of complainant school with OP’s and OP’s requested to move fresh application to activate the bank account, therefore complainant school. again approached OP’s vide Letter dated 11.07.2019 to activate the said bank account and also submitted Court Order dated 16.05.2019 showing all cases withdrawn by parties. The copy of Letter dated 11.07.2019 is annexed herewith as Exhibit C-8.

10. That upon Letter dated 11.07.2019 (Exhibit C-8), OP’s informed that said bank account maintained with OP’s, has been kept at “No Debit Status” on the false premise that registration of school has been cancelled by Registrar of Societies and in the absence of court order, OP’s is unable to take any action in respect of said account. The copy of Letter dated 16.07.2019 is annexed herewith as Exhibit C-9.

11. That thereafter, complainant school got issued notice to OP’s through its advocate for granting permission to operate the said bank account vide Notice dated 13.08.2019, but no reply was given. The copy of Notice dated 13.08.2019 is annexed herewith as Exhibit C-10.”

3. The opposite parties have strongly contested their case before the District Commission, by way of filing written reply and evidence by way of affidavit.

4. However, during pendency of the consumer complaint before the District Commission, on 20.01.2022, it was stated by Counsel for the opposite parties-HDFC Bank that the parties are heading towards compromise in the matter and on submission of indemnity bond, account will be opened and then the complainant will be able to operate it. On 20.01.2022, following order was passed by the District Commission:-

“…….Dated : 20th January 2022

ORDER

Reply and evidence on behalf of OPs not filed. It has been stated by counsel for OPs that parties are heading towards compromise and complainant has been directed to file indemnity bond and thereafter account will be opened and then complainant will be able to operate it. Counsel for complainant seeks time to ask from the complainant with regard to compromise. Granted. Put up on 01.02.2022…..”

5. Thereafter, the District Commission vide order dated 01.02.2022, directed the HDFC Bank to de-freeze the account of the complainant and the matter was adjourned to 08.02.2022. Relevant part of the order dated 01.02.2022 is reproduced hereunder:-

Dated : 1st February 2022

ORDER

Counsel for complainant has stated that indemnity bond has been submitted to the OP bank but account has not been de-freezed. OPs are directed to de-freeze th