Full Judgment
Barkat Ali Zaidi, President (Oral):
1. The short facts of the case are that the respondent complainant had opened two accounts in the Canara Bank, Raja Garden Branch No. (i) CAN SI A/c 87/92 and (ii) Saving Bank Account No. 13634 in the month of November 1992 with the appellant OP bank which the complainant operated till middle of 1993, but as averred, since he became ill he lost his memory, and was not able to operate the accounts for 12 years. Therefore, the complainant approached OP in the month of March/April, 2005, to find out, the balance in his accounts and the bank replied, that the records of the bank were destroyed. The bank further averred that after a lapse of 8 years from the year of non-operation of the accounts the records of the said accounts are destroyed.
2. The complainant, therefore, filed a complaint before the bank ombudsman, and the ombudsman, after hearing both the parties found no deficiency on the part of the bank.
3. The complainant ultimately, therefore, filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum praying that the OP bank be directed to pay him Rs. 35,902 towards his Savings Bank Account No. 13634 and Rs. 12,000 towards CAN SI A/c 87/92.
4. The OP bank opposed the claim quoting Condition No. 1.5.6. of the Manual of Instruction issued by the Head Office of the Canara Bank which provides that âafter a lapse of 8 years from the year to which the bound book of the exhausted/closed sheet pertains, it can be taken up for review for the sake of destruction along with other old recordsâ. The OP alleged that Payment Balancing Sheet dated 31.8.1994 prepared by the OP, fortunately available with the bank, showed that the aforenoted SB A/c No. 13634 was not mentioned therein, and, therefore, it can be inferred, that, either the above numbered account was destroyed, or closed, by the complainant on or before this date.
5. As regards to the another bank A/c No. CAN SI A/c 87/92 the OP stated that it was opened by the complainant for specific purpose, and was interlinked with Savings Bank A/c and its purpose was, that in case a share was allotted by any company in favour of the complainant (A/c holder) on his application, then that money will go from âCAN SI account of the Account Holder to the company, and in case share is not allotted then the money will revert back to the Savings Bank Account of the .account holder. The OP also alleged that complainant had not placed any record, with regard to the loss of his memory.
6. The defence of the bank is that in their Manual it has been mentioned as follows:
âafter a lapse of 8 years from the year to which the bound book of the exhausted/closed sheet pertains, it can be taken up for review for the sake of destruction along with other old records.â
and since there is no record available now in the bank, it appears that the papers relating to the Accounts have been destroyed.
7. This plea of the bank was rightly rejected by the District Consumer Forum because from the abovenoted mention in the Manual it cannot be inferred to clearly imply that the bank will be authorized to destroy the Records of the Account, after there has been no transaction in the Account for 8 years. The aforementioned words in the Manual, are confusing and confounding, and cannot be taken as giving a mandate to the bank for destroying Papers, relating to the Accounts after they have not been operated for 8 years. No guidelines of the Reserve Bank have been cited by the bank, which they could have been done. It would be disastrous if the banks were allowed to bum papers, relating to the Account if the account has not been operated for 8 years. That would be very easy way to appropriate Funds of Account Holders, who have not been able to operate their accounts, for one reason or the other. The bank is a trustee and cannot close the Account without intimation to the âAccount Holder. For non operation, the Account may become dead, but, it is always subject to revival. The District Consumer Forum was, therefore, justified in its view, that the bank has acted dishonestly, in destroying the Papers relating to the Account, and they are, therefore, liable to reopen the account, and make the requisite Payment to the Account Holder. The decision of the District Consumer Forum is, therefore, wholly justified, and there is prima facie no merit in this appeal, which is, accordingly dismissed in limine.
8. Bank Guarantee/FDR, if any, furnished by the appellant be returned forthwith.
Appeal dismissed.