Sri Akshaya Kumar Mohapatra, aged about 57 years
S/o: Late Suryamani Mohapatra,
At: Koranta, PO: Randiahat, PS:Bhadrak(R)
Dist:Bhadrak
………………….Complainant
(Vrs.)
1. The Sr.Branch Manager,
Bank of of India,
Randia Branch,
Randiahat, PS:Bhadrak(R)
Dist:Bhadrak
2. Zonal Manager,
Bank of India,
Bhubaneswar
……………………Opp.Parties
Order No.09 dt.01.07.2015:
The case of the Complainant is that he is having his S.B.A/c.No.535610100003576 (joint) with O.P.No.1-Bank. He has been supplied with one ATM card for withdrawal of money from his above account. The Complainant for his need on 23.08.2014 went to nearby Bank of India ATM in Randia at around 0955 hrs.. He made a transaction at the ATM for an amount of Rs.10,000/- through debit card provided by O.P.-Bank connecting to his S.B.Account No. 535610100003576 in the name of Suryamani Mohapatra & Akshaya Kumar Mohapatra(Complainant). Again after the first transaction, the Complainant tried to make another transaction for an amount of Rs.8,000/- at just after the first transaction but unfortunately neither cash nor any transaction slip came out from the ATM. The Complainant got surprised when no money came out. He waited for 15 minutes and left the ATM putting the cancel button as he was in hurry mood to go outside in an urgent work and the Bank was not opened at that time. As the next day was Sunday, the Complainant lodged complaint in the O.P.No.1-Branch on 25.08.2014. He met the Branch Manager who forwarded the complaint through her e-mail to their concerned Officer and told the Complainant to contact after 2/3 days. After waiting 2/3 days the Complainant met the O.P.No.1 who told that his complaint has been sent to higher authority. The Complainant also contacted the ATM in-charge of Bank of India posted at Mumbai. But after failing to get any positive result, the Complainant lodged FIR at Bhadrak(Rural) PS vide SDE No.436 dt.18.11.2014. After several request and run the O.P.No.1 asked to fill up an insurance claim Form attaching all requisite documents in the month of November,2014. Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed this case on 09.03.2015 praying for a direction to O.P.No.1 to repay the amount i.e. Rs.8,000/- which was wrongly debited to his S.B.Account along with payment of compensation of Rs.5,000/- and cost of litigation.
O.P.-Bank filed written version stating therein that the Complainant is an account holder of the Bank having S.B.Account No.535610100003576. The Complainant has given a written complaint before the O.P-Bank alleging that he had made a transaction at the BOI, ATM for an amount of Rs.10,000/- on 23.08.2014 through his Debit Card. After the 1st transaction the Complainant tried to make another transaction for an amount of Rs.8,000/- through his Debit Card and no cash came out from the ATM. The finacle menu of ATMREV reveals that the transaction was successful. ATM in-charge at Mumbai informed the O.P. that the transaction showing success, the question of no cash came out from the ATM machine does not arise. The transaction statement of BOI, Randia in connection to S.B.A/c.No. 535610100003576 of the Complainant reveals that the amount of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.8,000/- withdrawn on the same day i.e. 23.08.2014. It proves that the Complainant has withdrawn Rs.10,000/- and Rs.8,000/- on 23.08.2014. So the O.Ps have not committed any acts with amount to deficiency in service. Therefore, the O.Ps are not liable to pay compensation and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
We have heard the Complainant in person and the Ld.Counsel for the O.Ps. and perused the documents available on record. Complainant during course of hearing submitted that he made 1st transaction of Rs.10,000/- from nearby Bank of India ATM in Randia on 23.08.2014 through his Debit Card. Thereafter he made another transaction of Rs.8,000/- through his Debit Card. Unfortunately neither cash nor any transaction slip came out from the said ATM. This fact was brought to the notice of O.P.No.1-Bank and SDE No.436 dt.18.11.2014 was made in Rural Police Station, Bhadrak. In spite of repeated requests the O.Ps neither provided the CCTV footage of that day nor as yet credited Rs.8,000/- to his S.B.Account. Ld.Counsel appearing for O.Ps submitted that the finacle menu of ATMREV reveals successful transaction of Rs.8,000/- on 23.08.2014. Further, the ATM in-charge at Mumbai also informed the O.P. that the transaction was success. He also submitted that no CCTV is available on that ATM. Having heard both the parties we are convinced that the Complainant has not received Rs.8,000/- which had withdrawn from the ATM of O.P-Bank through his Debit card on 23.08.2014 as there was some machinery problem. Burden lies heavily on O.Ps to prove their case that the Complainant had received Rs.8,000/- which had withdrawn on 23.08.2014. Merely saying that transaction is successful is not enough without any documentary evidence. The O.P-Bank at best could have proved their case by filing CCTV footage of that ATM on the particular date whether the Complainant has received the withdrawn amount. According to O.P-Bank, no CCTV is available in that ATM. It seems that the O.P. is trying to feather its own nest i.e. to make profit, for itself at the expense of others. Automatic Teller Machine was introduced by the Banks on their own accord with a view to make easy withdrawals of money by the customers by simply inserting the ATM card and drawing the money from ATM without coming to the Bank. It is a new concept introduced by the Banker. Though it is meant for the benefit of the customer, prime responsibility lies with the O.P.-Bank to protect the interest of customers and their money deposited in the Bank. Heavy responsibility lies with the O.P.-Bank to protect the money of the Complainant/ customers as the custodian for the money deposited by the Complainant in the Bank. The O.P.-Bank also collecting maintenance/service charges of ATM. So the responsibility fully rests on the shoulders of the O.P.-Bank to safeguard the money of the Complainant or any other customer.
It is no doubt true that service providers like Banks have to ensure that no such fraudulent withdrawals are taken place and that is why every bank is obliged to install CC TV in the ATM Counter and only through the CCTV footage banks are able to detect fraudulent withdrawals. When no such CCTV footage has been filed by the O.P-Bank, we are unable to accept the contention of the O.P.-Bank that transaction for withdrawal of Rs.8,000/- by the Complainant on 23.08.2014 was successful. In this connection, we rely on a decision of the Hon’ble State CDR Commission, Odisha, Cuttack in First Appeal No.655 of 2011(Chief Manager, SBI, Bhadrak Vs. Shri Purna Chandra Nayak) where in the Complainant-Respondent himself had withdrawn the money as alleged by the O.P.-Appellant but no C.C.T.V. Camera was produced by the Bank in spite of repeated order. In the light of aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble State Commission, we are inclined to hold that non-supply of footage of CCTV to the Complainant constitutes deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.-Bank. Accordingly, it is ordered:
O R D E R
In the result, the complaint is allowed in part on contest against O.Ps 1 & 2. The O.Ps are directed to credit Rs.8,000/- to the S.B. Account No. 535610100003576 of the Complainant within 30 days of receipt of this order along with admissible interest from 23.08.2014 till payment is made in full, failing which O.Ps are directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant besides the awarded amount with interest as aforesaid. Parties to bear their own cost.
