Date of Filing : 17.01.2023 Date of Disposal : 12.04.2023 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

DATED THIS THE 12^th DAY OF APRIL 2023 PRESENT HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT Mr. K.B.SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER Mrs M.DIVYASHREE : LADY MEMBER Appeal No.106/2023 State Bank of India Shivanchetty Garden, 1/1A Assaye Road, Near Ulsoor Lake, Bangalore-560042.

Rep. by its Branch Manager, Dhananjay Kumar Shriwastava . ..Appellant/s (By Adv.M/s.Guru Associates)

VS

1.

Suresh T Bhavnani Aged about 69 Years, R/at B-5/149, 2nd Floor, BDA Flats, Kalahalli, S.C.Garden P.O., Bangalure-560042. ...Respondent/s (Party-in-person)

O R D E R

HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1. This is an appeal filed U/s.41 of CPA 2019 by OP/Appellant aggrieved by the order dtd.14.12.2022 passed in CC/270/2021 on the file of 1^st Addl., District Commission, Bengaluru urban. (Parties to the appeal henceforth are referred to their rank assigned to them by the Commission below).

2. The Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order, appeal papers and heard.

3. The undisputed facts are the Complainant has opened an account under Senior Citizen Savings Scheme (SCSS) by depositing Rs.1 lakh on 17.12.2016 in account no.61336999379 for five years and in case if he wishes to opts for further extension, the same be extended for another period of three years. However, the bank without any consent from the Complainant, closed the said SCSS account before its maturity i.e. before attaining five years and remitted Rs.1 lakh to some other account which is not at all related to him. OP bank has accepted its wrong before banking ombudsman, wherein held, there is negligence and careless attitude by the bank in opening the account for a period of three years instead of five years and closing the account after three years, thereby awarded compensation of Rs.75,000/- which was already paid by the bank. Hence, it is the contention of OP bank that since bank was penalised by banking ombudsman and the same has been paid, Complainant is barred to file the complaint for the same cause of action before the Commission.

4. On the contrary, it is the contention of the Complainant that, banking ombudsman except imposing penalty of Rs.75,000/- not ordered to extend the SCSS deposit from the date on which it was closed by the OP under the same account number and to continue the same on the terms & conditions and rate of interest as mentioned while opening of the said accounts. Further OP bank has not answered to the Complainant‟s query till date in respect of “receipt of SMS alerts about the closure of FD stating „as per request, the FD has been closed” and “when the OP bank has contacted him to close the FD”. Further OP bank has failed to furnish the letter/document/permission of Government Department, corrected form 15H, so also, the details of the deposits/principal amount, term, rate of interest, value date, maturity date, maturity value, nominee, interest amount, and interest frequency, TDS, details of tax deduction, entries in the pass book etc., sought by the Complainant till date. On perusal of the findings of the banking ombudsman with reference to the facts and circumstances of the case, we found there is considerable force in the contention taken by the Complainant since the right of a senior citizen to the benefits of Government scheme has been fraudulently taken away by the bank. In this regard, we found, the Commission below has rightly recorded affirmative findings in para 10 to 16 of its order on the point of deficiency in service on the part of OP bank and accordingly awarded suitable reliefs which does not call for any interference of this Commission for the grounds set out in the appeal. Accordingly we proceed to dismiss the appeal with no order as to cost.

5. The amount in deposit is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for needful.

6. Notify copy of this Order to the Distr