Date of Filing :19/12/2017
Date of Order: :19/06/2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT.
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
Wednesday, the 19th day of May, 2019
C.C.No.4/2018
Between:
Sri G F J Suneeth Kumar, S/o. G.Arthur,
Aged about 65 years, Occ: Retired Project Engineer,,
R/o.Flat No. D-103, Sri Balaji Indraprasth Apartments,
H.No.1-1-508/1/3, Bakaram, Gandhinagar, (Post)
Hyderabad – 500 080., T.S.,
Moobile No. 7989326423, 9533974379. ……Complainant
And
1) Chief Grievance Redress Officer,
And General Manager, Andhra Bank,
Head Office, 5-9-11, Dr. Pattabhi Bhavan,
Saifabad, Hyderabad – 500 004.
2) The Managing Director,
Andhrra Bank, Head Office, 5-9-11
Patttabhi Bhavan, Saifabad,
Hyderabad – 500 004. ….Opposite Parties
Counsel for the complainant : Party in person
Counsel for the opposite Parties : Mrs. R.Lalitha Devi.
O R D E R
(By Smt. D.Nirmala, B.Com., LLB., Member on behalf of the bench)
- This complaint is preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act of 1986 seeking directions to opposite parties to recover the damages payable to the complainant, from the Branch Manager of Kavadiguda Branch, Asst.General Manager of Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar Branch (2) and Chief Manager of Ashok Nagar Branch, Andhra Bank, Hyderabad at Rs.10,000/- each, totaling Rs.40,000/- and costs of this complaint.
- The averments of the complainant are in brief :
The complainant filed a complaint before opposite party No.1 on 26-10-2016 with regard to the non-functioning of printing machine in Kavadiguda Branch of Andhra Bank. The complainant further submitted that he wrote a complaint dated 26-1-2017 and sent the same by SPA No.EN602193804 IN on 27-01-2017 of Indian Post and the same was delivered to the Opposite party No.1 on 30-1-2017 with regard to the abnormal delay in issuing cheque book non-function of pass book printing machine at Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar branch of Andhra Bank. The complainant further submitted that he wrote a complaint on 16-7-2017 to the Opposite party No.1 with regard to non-functioning of pass book printing machine at Sanjeeva Reddy nagar and Ashok Nagar Branch of Andhra Bank, Hyderabad. The same letter was sent by Indian Post on 17-7-2017 and it was delivered to Opposite party No.1 on 18-7-2017.
In response to the complaint dated 26-10-2016 the Asst. General Manager, Andhra Bank, head office on 5-09-2011 Dr.Pattabhi Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad – 500004 had replied accepting the facts vide complaint dated 26-1-2017 and 17-7-2017. Opposite party No.1 did not give any reply even after 10 months. The act of the Opposite party No.1 caused inconvenience to the complainant ( who is Senior Citizen) and such acts on part of the Opposite party No.1 amounts to deficiency of service. Hence the present complaint is filed for the above said reliefs.
3. Written version filed by the Opposite party No.1 & 2: Denying the allegations made against the Opposite party No.1 and stated that regarding the non-functioning of the printing machine in Kavadiguda Branch of Andhra Bank, Hyderabad. The same was replied by the Opposite party No.1 branch vide letter No.666/34/1325 dated 03-11-2016 stating that the non-functioning of pass book printing machine is due to some technical problem .
It is further submitted that even though non-functioning of the pass book printing machine the Opposite party No.1 made an alternative arrangement for issuing account statement for the entries in their branch itself. It is further submitted that Hyderabad city itself Andhra Bank is having nearly 75 branches. In all branches pass book printing machines were provided and in ATMs also Pass book printing machine provided nearly 100 ATM pass book printers were instituted. The complainant is neither a customer of Kavadiguda branch nor Ashok Nagar branch so the question of deficiency of service does not arise. It is further submitted that the complainant is the customer of Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar Branch, Hyderabad. The allegation with regard to abnormal delay in issuing cheque book is in correct. In fact, the complainant has not submitted requisition slip in time for issuance of cheque book. After submission of requisition slip the complainant was issued a cheque book and he is utilized the same since May 2017. So there is no violation of rules and regulations and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Therefore it is prayed that the present complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. The complainant and the opposite parties filed their Evidence affidavits and written arguments. Complainant got marked Exs. A1 to A5 documents on behalf of him. Heard both sides.
5. On the basis of pleadings, evidence affidavit, documents and arguments
the following points are necessary for determination.
Points for determination:
- Whether there is any deficiency on the part of the opposite parties as alleged by the complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled any relief as prayed for?
- Is any other relief?
6. Point No.1 & 2: The admitted facts of the case are that the complainant filed a complaint before Opposite party No.1 on 26-10-2016 for non-functioning of pass book printing machine in Kavadiguda Branch of Andhra Bank, Hyderabad and the General Manager of Opposite party No.2 had replied accepting the facts vide Lr.No.666/34/1325 dated 03-11-2016. It is the case of the complainant that being a Senior citizen he visited Kavadiguda, Ashoknagar and Sanjeevreddy Nagar branches of Andhra Bank, wherever he goes, the pass book printing machine is non-functioning and also delay in issuing cheque book though letter received by Opposite party but failed to give any reply. To support the said contention the complainant relied on Ex.A1 to A5 and also a citation of Hon’ble State Commission of Telangana on the said aspect the learned counsel for the Opposite party urged that though pass book printing machines are in non-functioning the bank provided alternative arrangement to the customers for issuing account statement for entries in the Opposite party branch itself.
We perused the material placed on record by the complainant the facts borne out from the record Ex.A1, A2 & A3 are correspondence letters to the opposite party with regard to non-functioning of pass book printing machine dated 26-10-2016, 26-01-2017 and 16-7-2017 respectively and also facts borne out from the record of Ex.A2 is a letter addressed by the Opposite party No.2 to the complainant dated 3-11-2016 with regard to the reply for Ex.A1. The said documents Ex.A1 to A5 which are relied by the complainant, in that no single document whispers that the Opposite party bank refused to print the pass book entries. It is the contention of Opposite party bank that they have arranged alternative arrangements to issue statement of account entries in the bank. In the Ex.A3 the complainant himself admitted that the recitals of Ex.A3 in para No.2 “ in the absence of AGM I had contacted a middle aged lady clerk who was seated in counter No.6 and expressed my problem she had casually asked me to get the print out same manually from the clerk seated in the adjoining counter. But I had observed that there was a huge crowd of other customers eagerly waiting for their pass book print outs. This piece of evidence” enough that the Opposite party provided alternative arrangement to issue statement of account of entries in pass book. From Ex.A3 we come to the conclusion that when pass book printing machine is not working the Opposite party has provided separate counter provided to print the pass book. So there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties.
It is further contention of the complainant that there is abnormal delay in issuing cheque book to the complainant to substantiate the said pleading the complainant did not adduce any cogent evidence except the self style testimony the complainant did not adduce any documentary evidence. Merely taking plea in the complaint deposed in the affidavit evidence and in written argument is not a conclusive proof unless there is some documentary proof to support the pleading in the absence of the same, the plea taken by the complainant that there is abnormal delay in issuing the cheque book cannot be tenable.
The complainant relied on the citations of Hon’ble State Commission, Telangana, Hyderabad Sham Rao Vs.State Bank of India published in sakshi daily Newspaperthe facts and circumstances of the case is difference from the case on hand.
In the light of the above discussion and facts borne out from the record we are of view that the complainant failed to establish the ground of deficiency of service against the opposite party No.1 as such he is not entitled any relief sought for by him both the points are answered accordingly in favour of the opposite party No.1&2 and against the complainant.
Point No3: In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by her, pronounced by us on this the 19th day of June , 2019.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Exs. filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1-Copy of complaint dt.26.10.2016
Ex.A2- Copy of Letter No.666/34/1325,dt.3.11.2016.
Ex.A3 & 4- Copy of complaint petitions
Ex.A5- Copy of tips for safe banking.
Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite parties:–
Nil-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
