PNB vs Rupa Mahajan Pahwa

MRS Rupa Mahajan Pahwa filed a consumer complaint before District Forum Sheikh Sarai, Phase -II New Delhi against Petitioner/Punjab National Bank. Her complaint was that the bank had issued a duplicate passbook to a ''third person''. The savings bank account in question was in the joint name of Rupa and her husband Ajay Pahwa. Apparently, the bank had issued the duplicate pass book at a time when relationship between her and her husband had soured to the point of issue of a divorce notice from the husband.

AS per the complaint, the husband had deserted the complainant and their infant daughter, without any financial support. She was therefore, seeking award of maintenance through court proceedings against her husband. Allegedly, issue of a duplicate passbook by the bank resulted in release of all the confidential financial details of the complainant, without her authority and as per para 12 of the Complaint "The Complainant is suffering on two accounts for the lapse on part of the bank. She had to face utmost humiliation in the court where her case is going on. She is undergoing acute mental torture and harassment, as her situation is already very bad and this has made it worse. It is going to affect the amount of maintenance and alimony drastically. This has left her completely distort, as she already is under tremendous tension having been deserted (with a minor daughter) by her husband without a single penny or shelter."

IT is evident from the contents of the Complaint that the Complainant perceives the conduct of the Bank in issuing a duplicate passbook, without her knowledge and consent, as the direct cause for reduction in the quantum of relief granted to her in the divorce proceedings. The prayer in the complaint has quantified this amount as Rs.7 lakhs which has been claimed as compensation. The District Forum has allowed the complaint with award of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation for the suffering of the Complainant, Rs.30,000/ - for deficiency of service and Rs.5000/ - as cost of litigation. While doing so, it has observed: "Bank''s capricious conduct in issuing of duplicate passbook to a unauthorized person has caused mental agony, harassment and emotional sufferings to the complainant. The complainant is to be compensated for redressal of her trauma and vindication of her right. We direct the OP to pay Rs.1,00,000/ - compensation for mental agony harassment and suffering we further direct the OP to pay to the complainant Rs.30,000.00 as compensation for deficiency in service and Rs.5,000.00 as cost of litigation. Had the bank issued passbook on the basis of letter dated 30.06.2007 the bank would have shown an entry in its record and would have also contradicted the affidavit of the complainant in its reply filed on 13.2.2008. During the course of arguments on 11.03.2008 when the OP Bank was asked to show the same and stated that somebody had brought in person. We take a serious view of the capricious attitude of OP in manipulating evidence and practicing a fraud on the judicial system, for which we impose a penalty of Rs.5,000/ - in favour of State Consumer Welfare Legal Aid New Delhi."

THE Appeal of OP/Punjab National Bank was partly allowed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission to lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/ -, including cost holding that: - "7. It appears that information particularly from the passbook issued to unauthorized person is being used by the husband of the respondent in the divorce and maintenance proceedings. Respondent who is present in person states that the appellant -bank is furnishing secret information regarding her FDRs etc. which are being used against her by her husband. There is no dispute that there has not been any withdrawal from the account of the respondent by the said unauthorized person to whom the pass book was issued and therefore no financial loss has occurred to the respondent. 8. For the limited deficiency on the part of the appellant -Bank in issuing pass book and passing some other information which was not to be disclosed to some other person, we deem that lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000/ - which shall include cost of litigation shall meet the ends of justice."

THE above decision has been challenged by the Punjab National Bank in the present Revision Petition. Mr. U.C. Mittal, Advocate for the Petitioner/Bank, as also Respondent/Complainant in person, have been heard. The stress of learned counsel for the Petitioner/Bank was on the fact that as per the Account Opening Form, it was a joint account of the Complainant with her husband. A copy of the application for opening of this account is on record. It shows that the mode of operation of the account was meant to be "E OR S". It was explained as either or survivor meaning thereby that it could be operated either by the Complainant or by her husband, as a joint account holder. Learned counsel for the bank drew our attention to averment in para 10 of the written reply filed by the Bank before the District Forum. It is clearly stated therein that the duplicate passbook was issued by the Bank at specific instructions of the account holder, Mr. Ajay Pahwa as per letter dated 30.6.2007. A copy of this letter of 30.6.2007 is also on record and is perused. The letter, carrying the signature of Ajay Pahwa, authorises the Manager, the Punjab National Bank, Vasant Kunj, to issue a passbook and hand it over to the ''bearer of the letter''. The same was accordingly issued on 6.7.2007. It is argued on behalf of the Bank that as authority to issue the passbook was specifically given by one of the two account holders, no liability can be fixed on the Bank for issuing the same.

PER contra, it was argued by the Respondent/Complainant that the conduct of the Bank is not above board in this case. For one thing, it is not the case of the Bank that the original passbook had been lost or stolen and therefore a duplicate was issued. The letter of Shri Ajay Pahwa merely stated that the passbook was not available with him. She also pointed out that the authorisation was in the nature of an open authorisation in favour of whoever physically held and carried it to the OP/Bank. In order to ensure that the passbook did not go into the hands of anyone other than a person authorised by one of the two holders of the account, the Bank should have demanded specific authorisation in the name of an individual. She argued that in all banking transactions whenever any authorisation is issued in the name of a third person, the account holder also has to necessarily attest the signature of the authorised person, in the body of the letter itself.

WHEN confronted with this argument, learned counsel for the Bank conceded that letter of authorisation, without attestation of the signature of the bearer, amounted to a lapse on the part of the Bank. In this background, the observation of the District Forum that the Bank Manager, Shri M.L. Kalra, who appeared before it on 10.4.2008 had failed to produce any record of any entry in the Bank''s register to identify the person who had received the passbook on 6.7.2007 under the authorisation from Shri Ajay Pahwa dated 30.6.2007, acquires a special significance.

THE Revision Petition makes a deflective and unconvincing attempt to explain this lapse by pointing out that a debit of Rs.100/ - towards charge for issue of a passbook was made in the relevant account on 6.7.2007. It also claims that the passbook was handed over to Shri N.K. Pahwa, father of Mr. Ajay Pahwa, over the counter on 6.7.2007. The Revision Petition also claims that the letter of 30.6.2007 carries the signature of Mr. N.K.Pahwa. We consider these claims to be nothing more than an attempt to gloss over a significant lapse. The fact remains that there was no specific authorisation in favour of Shri N.K. Pahwa in the letter of 30.6.2007. Nor was his signature attested in the letter by Sri Ajay Pahwa.

IN view of the above, we find no merit in the Revision Petition. The same is dismissed with cost of Rs.25,000/ - to be paid by the Petitioner/Bank to the Respondent/Complainant, in addition to the award of the State Commission.