The burden of proving that a transaction constitutes a ‘commercial purpose’ under the Consumer Protection Act lies with the party asserting it. An overdraft facility availed by an individual against personal fixed deposits does not ipso facto exclude them from the definition of a 'consumer' in the absence of evidence.

JUDGMENT

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PRESIDENT

1. The facts of the case as per the District Commission record are as under:

1. By this complaint, the complainant submits that he had a Bank Account with erstwhile Lord Krishna Bank, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi, which was opened some time in 2002. He had Certified True, excellent dealing with the said Bank said Bank and had made several FDs amounting Rs1,45,000 approximately in the name of himself and his family members in the said bank. The said Bank was merged with Centurian Bank &Centurian Bank in turn was merged with OP Bank. Real trouble was started upon merger of Centurian Bank with the OP Bank The complainant did not have much dealings with the OP Bank and the OP has closed/swindled most of his F.D. amounts with false and manifold interest. With Lord Krishna Bank, he had taken OD amount against his DRs which he kept on paying off & on and never had an irregular balance. He did not get even single notice from either Lord Krishna or Centurian Bank for any irregularity in his OD account. However, OP Bank never bothered to get a debit confirmation from him when they bok over his FD Account from the merged Banks. The OP Bank had shown Rs.51834 Rs 25,542/-as debit account against the complainant when they took over from the previous Banks. This was inflated figure which did not tally with his account. According to complainant, appears that OP Bank had made this figure as basis & had multiplied compounding interest manifold & thus wiping off capital amount of his FDRs. According to him, OP Bank had misled even RBI & had shown Kavita Batra, Siddarth Batra, Monika Batra as partners, which is absolutely wrong. These persons never opened any joint account with the complainant. When basis of calculation is wrong, how could the outcome be correct. He had been requesting OP Bank to provide him statement of his account since inception, which they failed to supply. Now the OP bank is claiming that they never got original papers from the previous OP Bank has changed the numbers of the original FDs of the complainant many time create confusion & closed FDRs of complainant and his relatives on their own, without their ledge and permission. To the best of his knowledge, he had never received any notices his previous Bankers regarding any irregularity. He sincerely wanted to settle the matter amicably with OP Bank& RBI. RBI had instructed him to go to any other forum to get his rightful dues. Therefore, he had come to this Forum to settle the matter.

2. Complainant has prayed that OP be directed to settle his account and be instructed to pay his rightful amount with interest & penalty as deemed fit.

3. Alongwith the complainant, complainant has filed letters dated 21.02.2012, 22.08.2013, 23.08.2013, 22.03.2014 written to the OP Bank and copy of the complaint dated 13.11.2013 addressed to the Banking Ombudsman, order dated 08.05.2014 passed by the Banking Ombudsman, letter dated 12.01.2014 by OP to complainant showing details/status of FDs and OD account. Complainant has also placed on record, copy of the passbook of erstwhile Lord Krishna Bank, Rajouri Garden for the period from 24.04.2002 to 13.10.2007.

4. Upon admission of the complaint on 15.10.2014, notice was issued to the OP, who filed written statement. In the reply, OP refuted all allegations and contentions made in the complaint and submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed outrightly. According to OP, this is an abuse of the process of law as it fails to establish or give rise to any cause of action under the