DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No. 305/2017
Sh. Jay Prakash Singh
S/o Late Raghunath Singh
R/o C/o Jily Ram H. No.187, Gram Post,
Ghitorni, Old Oil Depot,
Mangu Mohalla, New Delhi-110030 ….Complainant
Versus
1. Axis Bank
ATM Axis Bank
Chhatarpur, New Delhi-110074
2. IDBI Bank Ltd.
Kataria Complex, Subhash Nagar,
New Railway Road,
Haryana-122001 ….Opposite Parties
Date of Institution : 29.08.17 Date of Order : 04.02.2020
Coram:
Ms. Rekha Rani, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
- Case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant maintains a bank account with IDBI bank (OP-2). The complainant was issued an ATM Debit Card having No.5559362640242317 in connection with his account which enabled him to withdraw money from his account using the ATM. It is averred that on 08.03.2017 the complainant accessed the Axis Bank (OP No.1) ATM near Chhatarpur main road to withdraw Rs.10,000/-. But the transaction was not successful as probably the machine was not working. The complainant received a receipt from the ATM machine wherein it is mentioned that record number 7553, withdrawal transaction No.059 is declined due to “insufficient fund”. It is further stated that the complainant approached OP No.2’s branch at Mahipal Pur and showed them the receipt received, he was assured that the money will be recredited. Thereafter, he made various complaints and approached his own branch and he was once again assured that the money will be recredited after conducting the investigation. But finally after running from pillar to post he was informed by OP No.2 that since OP No.1 is not remitting the payment therefore they will not credit the said amount in his account.
1.1 It is next averred that the complainant approached the Reserve Bank of India and was informed that OP No. is not willing to remit the amount as according to OP No.1 someone else has withdrawn the money from his account. It is next averred that the complainant is a security guard and Rs.10,000/- is his hard earned money, it is a big amount for him. Complainant thus approached this Forum seeking relief for the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. It is prayed that OP’s be directed to pay Rs.10,000/- that are withdrawn from his account alongwith compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and harassment.
- OP No.1 resisted the complaint inter-alia submitting that the complainant had withdrawn Rs.10,000/- initially from the ATM ID SPCN16010 located at Chhatarpur main road of OP No.1 vide transaction no. 7552 on 08.03.2017 at about 7.55 am. After the said withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- there was a balance of Rs.4,966/- in the account of the complainant as per various reports received from the ATM Cell. Copy of ATM log/EJ copy, ATM cash balancing report and ATM switched report which are annexed as Annexure R-1 to R-4. with the written statement of OP. It is further submitted that the said transaction was successful. It is next stated that the complainant again entered an amount of more than the balance in his account and that is why the second transaction slip bearing No.7553 filed by the complainant shows remarks ‘insufficient funds’. OP No.1 denying any deficiency of service on its account prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
- The claim filed on behalf of the complainant is also resisted by OP No.2 wherein inter-alia it is submitted that on 08.03.2017 the complainant was having an opening balance of Rs.14,966/- in his account. Out of Rs.14,966/- vide transaction No.7552 Rs.10,000/- was withdrawn by him and balance of Rs.4966/- remained in his account. Further as there were insufficient funds in his account the withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- was declined by the ATM machine and the receipt showed therein mentions ‘insufficient fund’. OP No.2 in support of its case has filed Statement of account of the complainant alongwith mail correspondence received from OP No.1 and a Compact Disc (CD) covering CCTV footage dated 08.03.2017 which are annexed as Annexure-A with the reply of OP No.2.
- Complainant has filed rejoinder to the W.S. of OP No.2. It is noticed that complainant in the rejoinder has first time mentioned that he made two transactions on the said date i.e. 08.03.17. It is averred that around 7.53 a.m. he tried using the ATM machine for withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- but neither any money was dispensed with nor any transaction slip came out from the ATM machine. But to his surprise the complainant received a message on his registered mobile number that an amount of Rs.10,000/- has been withdrawn from his saving bank account. Thereafter the complainant again tried using the ATM machine vide transaction No. 7553 which was declined due to ‘insufficient fund’.
- Evidence is filed on behalf of the complainant. Evidence of Sh. Jayanth Lahri, Dy. Vice President of OP No.1 is filed. Evidence of Meenu Gupta, AR of OP No.2 is filed. Written arguments are filed by the parties. Arguments on behalf of the parties are heard and record is perused carefully.
- After having heard the Ld. Counsel of the parties and perusing the material placed on record we are of the opinion that the complaint fails on various grounds. The first ground is that pleadings in the complaint and replication are contradictory. The case in the complaint is that he accessed the machine on 08.03.17 and has appended record No.7553 at page No.1 with the complaint wherein the withdrawal transaction is declined. In the rejoinder it is submitted that the complainant on the very same day had accessed the ATM machine wherein he had entered his PIN for withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- but he did not receive anything whereas he got a message on his mobile phone that Rs.10,000/- has been withdrawn. It is pertinent to mention here that infact he accessed the machine three times, first time only the balance enquiry was made. Subsequently, Rs.10,000/- was withdrawn and then there was a declined transaction. Going through the transactions made on 08.03.2017 as shown in the EJ record, number of persons had successfully transacted as money had been dispensed with from the same ATM machine throughout the day. It is thus inferred that on this particular date this particular machine was not out of order and was functioning properly.
- The complainant alleges that the EJ report, Switch report, No excess cash certificate and CCTV footage of the disputed transaction filed on behalf of OPs is false and fabricated/forged as the said documents were produced before the Banking Ombudsman after a delay of 35 days from the date of filing of the complaint before the Ombudsman. Complainant has not adduced any evidence proving the documents to be false and fabricated. Mere bald averments regarding the same are therefore rejected. The above mentioned documents are filed with the affidavit of Dy. Vice-President of OP No.1 Bank and are certified to be true copies by the Bank. The Forum has no reason to believe that a Bank would take the pains of forging the computerized documents to embezzle Rs.10,000/-.
- Another ground for dismissal of the complaint can be drawn after going through the e-mail dated 11/07/17 written by OP-1 Bank to Banking Ombudsman regarding complainant’s card number. The relevant portion of the email is as under:
“Subject: Re: Banking Ombudsman Complaint No.201617016004393 Card No.5559362640242317
Dear Sir/Madam,
The below are the findings on appended case basis attached reports:
- The said transaction is successful withdrawal as per EJ.
- There is no excess cash found on this ATM as per the shared documents/reports as proof.
- As per the CCTV footage, customer negligence case…”
- Finally while watching the CCTV footage annexed by OP No.2 two more people are seen with the complainant in the ATM Room. The same is re-affirmed by the complainant who submitted that two ATM machines were installed in the same room and the number of people inside the room while he was transacting/withdrawing the cash was more than one. This leads us to the conclusion that possibility of the ATM card and PIN number being compromised cannot be ruled out. This Forum is of the opinion that OP’s cannot be held liable for the negligence of the complainant.
- Evidence adduced by the OPs cannot be disbelieved as the EJ log, Statement of Account, ATM Cash Balancing report etc. of the bank shows that the transaction was successful and Rs.10,000/- was delivered to the person who was using ATM Card.
- Based on the discussion above, the complaint seems to be meritless and is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 04.02.2020
