- The Supreme Court ruled that a consumer complaint in a dispute involving the bank's premature encashment of a Joint Fixed Deposit in violation of the terms and conditions is maintainable.
- A person who uses a bank's services falls under the definition of a "consumer" under the Consumer Protection Act.
- The complainant and his father had opened a joint FD in HDFC Bank in this case. For 145 days, a sum of 75 lakhs was deposited jointly in the names of the complainant and his father.
- The FD amount was credited to the complainant's father's account on the father's request on May 31, 2016.
- The SCDRC determined that the dispute was primarily between the complainant and his father over the amount of the FD deposit, and that only a civil court could resolve such a dispute.
- The NCDRC ruled that the appeal had been withdrawn. The court noted that the essence of the complaint is that the respondent bank erred in proceeding to credit the proceeds of a joint FD exclusively to his father's account.
- The SCDRC should have determined whether the complaint amounted to a lack of service as defined by the 1986 Act.
- In the proceedings before the SCDRC, the appellant made no claim against his father.
- As a result, the SCDRC erred in concluding that there was a dispute between appellant and his father.
- Even if the appellant and his father had a disagreement, that was not the subject of the consumer complaint. The complaint about a lack of service was directed at the bank.
- As a result, the court directed the NCDRC to hear the appeal on the merits.
"Loved reading this piece by Twinkle Madaan?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
