LI Network
Published on: December 13, 2023 at 15:38 IST
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Jalandhar, Punjab, recently ruled in favor of a complainant against Yes Bank, directing the bank to disburse a fixed deposit amount to the nominee.
The Commission, consisting of Harveen Bhardwaj (President) and Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member), held Yes Bank accountable for rejecting the valid claim made by the nominee, the son of the deceased FD depositor.
The Commission, citing relevant provisions of the Banking Regulation Act and the Banking Companies (Nomination) Rules, emphasized that the rights of the nominee prevail as long as the nomination is not canceled or varied. The ruling emphasized that in the case of the depositor’s death, the nominee is entitled to receive the deposit amount, with their rights superseding those of other claimants.
The case involved Smt. Asha Tiwari, the mother of the complainant, who held a fixed deposit with Yes Bank. Despite changing the nominee in favor of her son and following her demise, the bank refused to settle the claim, citing conflicting claims by legal heirs. The complainant approached the District Commission, asserting that the bank’s refusal violated statutory provisions, constituting a deficiency in service.
The Commission observed that the nominee, being the son, was entitled to the deposit amount as per the nomination rules.
It directed Yes Bank to release the amount to the nominee, along with compensation for mental agony, harassment, and litigation expenses. To safeguard the rights of potential claimants, the Commission instructed the complainant to provide an indemnity bond.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the rights of nominees in financial matters, as outlined by relevant banking regulations and nomination rules.
Case Title: Bhanu Kaushal vs Yes Bank Ltd.
