West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/72/2018

Sanjit Sengupta,S/O. Late Sibnath Sengupta, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Axis Bank Ltd, Represented by Branch Manager, - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjit Acharya

27 Sep 2023

ORDER

Shri Sudip Majumder- President-in-Charge.

            The complainant/petitioner files this case U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The fact of the case in brief is that the petitioner, Sanjit Sengupta, S/O. Late Sibnath Sengupta, resident of Saradish Pally, Tilpara, P.O and P.S. Suri, Dist. Birbhum is a bonafide customer of OP/Axis Bank Ltd., Suri Branch, Birbhum. The complainant has a savings account being No. 911010052430390 lying under the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. and the said account is operated by the complainant himself.

            It is the case of the complainant that on 13/07/2018 at about 12:30 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. the complainant had been to the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. in order to deposit Rs. 3,80,000/- and he after filling up the pay-in-slip for depositing the same went to the cash counter of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd..

            It is the case that when the complainant was about to deposit the aforesaid amount in his SB Account lying with OP/Axis Bank Ltd. the cashier advised the complainant to deposit in the machine.

            It is the case that accordingly the complainant had been to the said ATM machine and when he came before the said machine the guard of the Bank informed the complainant that he will not get any deposit receipt from the machine against his deposited amount and immediately after getting said information from the guard the complainant was in dilemma and he came to the cashier of the Bank and told him that no money receipt would be collected from the ATM machine against his deposit of  Rs. 3,80,000/-. That hearing the complainant the cashier assured the complainant that he may deposit the amount in the ATM Machine and he will be responsible if any loss occurred in respect of the said deposit.

 After getting assurance from the cashier of the OP/Axis Bank the complainant deposited the amount of Rs. 3,80,000/- in the ATM machine of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd., but he got message in his mobile that Rs. 3,40,000/- has been deposited in his aforesaid SB Account instead of Rs. 3,80,000/-. Immediately after getting he message the complainant came to the cashier and reported him the matter.

            It is the specific case of the complainant that the cashier of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. acknowledge the same in pay-in-slip and put down as “cash deposited in BNA Rs. 3,80,000/- credit Rs. 3,40,000/-

not credited Rs. 40,000/-” and after putting down the same he affixed the seal of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. and put his signature therein.

            Thereafter, the complainant had been to the OP/Axis Bank and requested the manager to refund the amount of Rs. 40,000/- which has not been credited inspite of deposited the same in ATM machine but the Bank authority did not refund the same.

            It is the further case that the complainant also requested the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. to provide the CC TV footage of the transaction made by him and also requested them to open the machine in presence of the complainant wherein it could be found the deposited currency note, but the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. did not provide the same to the complainant.

            Thereafter, the complainant filed a written complaint dated 24/07/2018 before the Branch Manager, Axis Bank Ltd., Suri Branch regarding the fact and deficiency in service on the part of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. The OP/Axis Bank official also received the letter of complaint and also acknowledged the same with a signature and affixed the seal of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. But the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. did not take any step even after getting written complaint from the complainant.       

            Hence, after finding no other alternative the complainant is compelled to file this case before this Forum/Commission for proper relief and prays for:-

1. To pass an order directing the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. to pay a sum of Rs. 40,000/- plus interest @ 18% p.a. since 13/07/2018.
2. To pass an order directing the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. to pay Rs. 30,000/- as compensation for harassment for mental agony caused by the OP/Axis Bank Ltd.
3.  To pass an order directing the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as litigation cost.
4.  Other relief/reliefs.

            The OP/Axis Bank Ltd. filed their written objection/version, and denied all the complaint against them. The OP/Axis Bank Ltd. also filed questionnaires and Evidence-in-chief on affidavit.  

Ultimately the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. prayed for dismissal of the case.

Complainant’s side submitted evidence-in-chief and written notes on argument. Some documents have also been filed by the complainant compared with the original ones. Thereafter, Ld. Advocate for the both sides made oral argument in support of their case.

            Heard Ld. Advocates for the both sides.

Considered.

            Perused all the documents.

Points for determination/Issues

1.  Whether the complainant is a consumer as per definition of the term ‘Consumer’ of the C.P Act. ?
2. Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try this case?           
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd.?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?

Point No. 1:

            In this case, the complainant has a savings account in the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. being savings Account No. 911010052430390. Thus the complainant is a consumer under the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. and the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. is the service provider. Hence, the complainant is a consumer as per Sec. 2(1)d(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Point No. 2:

            Pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum/Commission as per Sec. 11(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is Rs. 20,00,000/-. OP/Axis Bank Ltd., Suri Branch is situated in Birbhum District i.e. within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum/Commission as per Sec. 11(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. So, this Forum/Commission has territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction.

In this case, the cause of action arose from 13/07/2018 and the case has been filed on 21/08/2018 and as such it can be said that the complainant has filed this case within the statutory period of the C.P. Act, 1986 and as such the instant complaint is not barred by limitation U/S 24A of the C.P. Act, 1986.

Point No. 3:

            It appears from the documentary evidence in the case record that the cashier of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. acknowledge the fact in pay-in-slip and put down as “cash deposited in BNA Rs. 3,80,000/- credit Rs. 3,40,000/- not credited Rs. 40,000/-”  and after putting down the same he affixed the seal of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. and put his signature therein.

           

The OP/Axis Bank Ltd. stated in para 2 of their written version as …. “That Para 2 of the petition is not correct and the complainant did not deposit the money himself, it is found from the CC TV, Footage it is also found that his authorized person that deposited Rs. 3,40,000/- and which was reflected in the statement of amount of the complainant’s account.”

            On the date of argument this Commission suo moto asked the Ld. Advocate for OP/Axis Bank Ltd. that as per para 2 of their written version, if it is true whether the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. taken any steps for recovery of the said amount from the complainant? Ld. Advocate for the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. answered as ‘NO’.

            The OP/Axis Bank Ltd. also stated in para 5 of their written version as …… “That Para 5 is partly correct that after deposit the money he ask to one person of Bank and he assured if deposit the said money, we look after and should be reflect in your account.”

            Thus, the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. admitted the fact that the complainant had deposited the sum and the Bank official assured that they look after and should be reflect in complainant’s account.

            The OP/Axis Bank Ltd. specifically stated in para 6 of their written version as ……. “That Para 6 is not totally correct that the person who had written the pay slip only as he is the very known person of the said complainant.”

            Thus, the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. admitted the fact that the cashier of the said Branch of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. issued the pay-in-slip and acknowledge the fact by put down as “cash deposited in BNA Rs. 3,80,000/- credit Rs. 3,40,000/- not credited Rs. 40,000/-”. But, as per written version of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. “the person who had written the pay slip only as he is the very known person of the said complainant.”

            On the date of argument this Commission suo moto asked the Ld. Advocate for the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. that whether the said Branch Manager of OP/Axis Bank Ltd. taken any steps for the false acknowledgement by issuing pay-in-slip or not? Ld. Advocate for the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. answered as ‘NO’     

            OP/Axis Bank Ltd. written in Para Nos. 3 & 4 of their Affidavit-in-chief by D.W. Palash Halder, Branch Manager, Axis Bank, Suri as

            But, again the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. admitted the fact in Para 6 of their written version as “…..the person who had written the pay slip only as he is the very known person of the said complainant.”

            This, the affidavit-in-chief of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. on the point of ‘issuing pay-in-slip’ which was contradictory to their written version.

                       

OP/Axis Bank Ltd. stated in reply against the questionnaires of the complainant “That as per Bank Norms C.C. T.V. footage handed over the account holder within 90 days of the alleged incident.

It appears from the documentary evidence as available in the case record that the incident occurred on 13/07/2018 and this case was filed on 21/08/2018. Therefore, the complainant filed this case within 1 month 7 days from the date of incident. No C.C. T.V. footage has yet been produced before us by the OP/Axis Bank Ltd.

            Hence, we are of the view that the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. ought to have been more vigilant in verifying the cash deposited in ATM machine. It was necessary to take step by the OP/Axis Bank Ltd. that check the opening balance and closing balance of the ATM machine on 13/07/2018 and open the ATM machine in presence of the complainant to know actual currency note deposited by the complainant in the said machine on the said date.

            This Commission suo moto asked the Ld. Advocate for OP/Axis Bank Ltd. whether the Bank authority followed the necessary steps for verifying the fact or not? Ld. Advocate for OP/Axis Bank Ltd. answered as ‘NO’.

From the above discussion we are to opine that, the OP member/Axis Bank Ltd. showed the report to repudiate the claim of the complainant which is baseless and vexatious one.

So, it is proved beyond all reasonable doubts that the aforesaid act of the OP member is amounting to deficiency in service as per Sec. 2(1) (g) of C.P. Act, 1986 as well as unfair trade practice as per Sec. 2(1) (r) of the C.P. Act, 1986.

Hence, from the above discussion it is proved that the complainant could be able to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts.

Point No. 4:

            From the documentary evidence as available in the case record it is crystal clear that the complainant deposited the amount in question in the ATM machine of the OP/Axis Bank Ltd.

As in this case, it is proved that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP member.

Hence, the complainant is entitled to get relief or compensation as prayed for.

Thus, all the points are decided in favour of the complainant.

Complaint is sufficiently stamped and proved beyond all reasonable doubts.

• We find in Chengalrayan Cooperative Sugar Mills Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. (2000) 10 SCC 213 it was held that “Interest ought to have been awarded from the date on which the claim was filed before the Forum.”
• We also find in Krishna Bhagya Jala Nigam Ltd. Vs. G. Harishchandra Reddy & Anr. (2007) 2 SCC 720 it was held that “Only 9% interest be awarded on refund matter.”

           

 

In the instant case as per view of the Hon’ble Apex Court in several cases the interest will be given @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of this case.

From the above discussion we are to opine that, the OP members/Axis Bank Ltd. showed the report to repudiate the claim of the complainant which is baseless and vexatious one.

Hence, it is,

            O R D E R E D,

                                        that the instant C.F. Case No. 72/2018 be and same is allowed on contest with cost.

The OP /Axis Bank Ltd. is directed to pay the sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Forty Thousand only) to the complainant/petitioner along with interest thereon @ 9% per annum calculating on and from 21/08/2018 (i.e. from the date of filing of this case) till realization.

            The OP /Axis Bank Ltd. is also directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand only) to the complainant/petitioner as cost of litigation.

The entire decree will be complied by the OP within 45 (Forty five) days from this date of order, in default the complainant is at liberty to put this order to execution in accordance with law.

The instant case is thus disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given/handed over to the parties to this case free of cost.