Question: A legal heir submitted a claim for a missing customer's deposit after providing all documents required under the bank's Board - Approved policy. Even though the claim satisfied the prescribed requirements, the bank refused to consider it without citing any provision in its approved policy. As per the RBI Master Circular on Customer Service in Banks, 2014, was the bank's decision consistent with the prescribed requirements ?
Answer: No, Once a claimant has fulfilled the requirements specified under the bank's Board-Approved policy, the bank should assess the claim accordance with that policy. Refusing to consider the claim without any basis in the approved policy is not consistent with the RBI Master Circular.

Supporting evidence:
title: rbi.org.in/72MC010714CS.pdf
quote: Banks are advised to formulate a policy which would enable them to settle the claims of a missing person after considering the legal opinion and taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case
context: tion 107 / 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 107 deals with presumption of continuance and Section 108 deals with presumption of death. As per the provisions of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, presumption of death can be raised only after a lapse of seven years from the date of his/her being reported missing. As such, the nominee / legal heirs have to raise an express presumption of death of the subscriber under Section 107/108 of the Indian Evidence Act before a competent court.
If the court presumes that he/she is dead, then the claim in respect of a missing person can be settled on the basis of the same.
Banks are advised to formulate a policy which would enable them to settle the claims of a missing person after considering the legal opinion and taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case. Further, keeping in view the imperative need to avoid inconvenience and undue hardship to the common person, banks are advised that keeping in view their risk management systems, they may fix a threshold limit, up to which claims in respect of missing persons could be settled without insisting on production of any documentation other than (i) FIR and the non-traceable report issued by police authorities and (ii) letter of indemnity.

22.2 Settlement of Claims in respect of Missing Persons in Uttarakhand Disaster

In the aftermath of Uttarakhand Natural Disaster during June 14-20, 2013 the Office of the Registrar General of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India has devised a procedure for Registration of Death of Missing persons in Natural Calamities affected areas in Uttarakhand vide its circular F.No. 1/2/(Uttarakhand)/2011-VS-CRS dated August 16, 2013 (MHA Circular). A copy of MHA Circular is furnished at Annex VIII for reference. The MHA Circular has devised detailed procedure for registration and issue of 'Death Certificate' of a person reportedly missing since his/her visit to the site of disaster in Uttarakhand in June 2013.
In view of the above, banks are advised to settle the claims in respect of missing persons, covered by MHA Circular, without insisting on production of any documentation other than (i) the 'Death Certificate' issued by the Designated Officer under MHA Circular and (ii) letter of indemnity.
Banks are further advised that the provisions detailed in Para 22.1 above on 'Settlement of claims in respect of missing persons' would be applicable in other cases which are not covered by MHA Circular.