##PAGE1##

ADDITIONAL BENCH

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PUNJAB,DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.

First Appeal No.467 of 2023

Date of institution : 17.07.2023

Reserved on : 11.12.2025

Date of decision : 19.12.2025

Punjab National Bank, a body corporate constituted under the Banking

Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act,1970, having

its Head Office at Plot No.4, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi and having

its branches at different places including one at Majitha Road,

Amritsar, District Amritsar (Pb), through its Constituted Attorney/Senior

Manager, Sh. Dinesh Sehgal.

…..Appellant/opposite party

Versus

Smt. Ekta Nayyar D/o Vinod Kumar Khosla, presently residing at 229,

Tilak Nagar, Amritsar, Mobile No.98768-63346. Email

ektanayyar02@gmail.com.

….Respondent/complainant

First Appeal under Section 41 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the

order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the

District Consumer Disputes Redressal

Commission Sri Muktsar Sahib, camp court

at Amritsar in RBT/CC/506/2018

Quorum:-

Mr. H.P.S. Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member

Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member

Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Bhushan Bhatia, Advocate

For respondent : None

KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER

The instant appeal has been filed by appellant/Opposite

party against the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by District Consumer

Disputes Redressal Commission, Sri Muktsar Sahib, camp court at

Amritsar(in short, “District Commission”), whereby the complaint filed

FA No. 467 of 2023 2

by complainant against opposite party (in short ‘OP’), under the

Consumer Protection Act, was partly allowed while granting the

following relief:-

“13. Sequel to the above discussion, it has been

decided by this Commission that no forgery/cheating

has been committed by the opposite party but

certainly there is deficiency in service and negligence

on their part in encashing the FDs prematurely on the

instructions of only one person in the joint FDs.

Hence, this complaint is partly allowed directing the

opposite party to pay Rs.82,500/- i.e. 50% of the

amount of Rs.1,65,000/- since the complainant and her

husband had jointly invested the money in both the

joint FDs, whereas, as per RBI guidelines, the

signatures of both the parties were required, since this

was a premature withdrawal in this case. This amount

is to be paid with interest @7% per annum from the

date of encashing the FDs prematurely, i.e. 14.07.2016.

the opposite party is also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- in

lumpsum as compensation for mental agony,

harassment including litigation expenses. This order is

to be complied within forty five days from the date of

receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the awarded

amount will carry interest @9% per annum from

14.07.2016 till realization of the amount……...”

2. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties

will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Brief facts for the disposal of the appeal, as set out in the

complaint, are that the OP on 21.04.2015, had opened two saving

bank accounts bearing No.3400000140772442 and

No.3400000140772460 in the joint names of complainant and her

husband; namely, Aseem Nayyar. Thereafter on 23.04.2015, two

FDRs were purchased from the respective saving accounts for equal

amount of Rs.75,000/- each in their joint names. In one FDR, the

complainant was the first holder and in another FDR, the complainant

FA No. 467 of 2023 3

was the second holder. The complainant further stated that in the

month of April 2017, she was thrown out of her matrimonial house

along with her minor son by her in laws. Thereafter, in the month of

April 2017, she visited the OP-Bank and inquired about the saving

bank account, if any, existed in its branch. The complainant was

stunned to note that the above said FDRs were got encashed

prematurely by her father-in-law; namely, Anil Nayyar on 14.07.2016

fraudulently and the amount of Rs.82,726/- for each FDRs were

credited to saving bank account No.3400000140772442, to which her

husband was the first account holde