National Commission in HDFC Bank vs Anish Munjal on January 23, 2019

Facts:

Anish Munjal had a savings bank account with Centurian Bank of Punjab, which was taken over by the
HDFC Bank in May 2008. Munjal had obtained a credit card from HDFC Bank, which deducted Rs 53,043.68
from the balance in his savings bank account against his credit card dues. Aggrieved with the deduction,
Munjal approached the District Forum, which ruled in his favour. However, the bank had claimed that “the
credit card dues having not been paid, they were justified in deducting the same from the saving bank
account of the respondent.” This claim was dismissed by the District Forum. The bank then appealed
against the District Forum before the State Commission, which also ruled in favour of the customer. HDFC
Bank finally approached the NCDRC.

Contentions:

Munjal specifically stated in his complaint that he had taken credit card from HDFC Bank. The card was
last used in December 2005 and as per the demand of the bank, he had paid the amount and got the said
card cancelled.

The bank, however, said that the total amount of dues against Munjal in his credit card statement dated
5.12.2004 was Rs.9979.85, including the finance charges levied by the bank. The dues kept on increasing
on account of addition of late fee, over-limit fee and finance charges, though no fresh purchase was made
by Munjal. The bank claimed that he made purchases and made several part payments over a period of
this. The bank’s counsel told the National Commission,”However, he (Munjal) having not made full
payment of the credit card dues, the finance charges and late fee etc. continued to be added to his credit
card account and as a consequence, the said dues increased to Rs.53,043.68, till the date the said dues
were deducted from his saving bank account.”

Held:

The NCDRC noted that that Clause-6 of the terms and conditions, on which the credit card was issued,
allowed the bank to set-off dues of the cardmember from his savings account with the bank without any
notice. The commission, hence, set aside previous orders against the bank. It said, “In view of the
aforesaid clause, the petitioner bank was entitled to set off the credit card dues at any point of time,
without any notice to the complainant. Therefore, deduction of the amount of Rs.53,043.68 from the
saving bank account of the complainant was in consonance with the above referred condition stipulated
by the bank, while issuing the credit card to the complainant/respondent.”

Canara Bank vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.
IV (2006) CPJ 56 (NC)
Facts
Complainant was having a saving account with cheque facility with Sindri Branch of the Petitioner Bank.
Complainant issued a cheque of Rs.4916/- in favour of Insurance Company towards premium for renewal
of the policy for car on 29.4.2002. On 1.5.2002 Car of the complainant met with an accident. Complainant
lodged his claim with Insurance Company which was repudiated on the ground of non-payment of
premium. Complainant filed complaint before the District forum alleging Deficiency in service against
bank. Before District forum Petitioner Bank contested the matter. The Bank submitted that on 29.4.2002
only a balance of Rs. 2/- was lying in the account of the complainant. Complainant deposited an amount
of Rs.4,916/- with the said branch of Bank on 2.5.2002. Cheque was presented to the branch for
payment/through clearance on 7.5.2002. After debiting an amount of Rs.10/- towards service charges for
violation of non-maintenance of minimum balance, the balance in the saving account of the complainant
was Rs.4,908/- and therefore the said cheque was returned unpaid for insufficient fund. The District forum
while allowing the complaint directed the Petitioner Bank to pay Rs.1,08,896/- to meet the repair cost of
the damaged car and Rs. 60,000/- to meet the medical treatment. On appeal, the State Commission Partly
allowed the appeal. Against that order Petitioner bank filed Revision Petition before the National
Commission.
Issues
Whether the act of bank in dishonouring the cheque issued by the customer for not having maintaining
minimum balance in his account amounts to deficiency in service?
Held
The National Commission held that since the minimum balance was not maintained in the account,
amounts of Rs.10/- were debited on 31.01.2002, and again Rs.10/- on 28.2.2002 and again Rs.10/- on
30.2.2002 thereby leaving the credit balance of Rs.2/-. Further, an amount of Rs.4,916/- was deposited in
cash on 2.5.2002 and after debiting Rs.10/- towards service charges for not maintaining the minimum
balance on 2.5.2002 the balance lying in account was Rs. 4908/- obviously debiting the said amounts as
service charges by the bank was in conformity with instruction at

Case Laws on Banking 19

Sl.No.12.5.5 of the Manual. Thus, the stand taken by the bank that the balance on 7.5.2002 was Rs.4908/-
has to be accepted. Therefore, bank cannot be held deficient in service in not honouring the cheque dated
29.4.2002.