THE PRESIDENT

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE No.  CC-  41 of 2020

 

 

Mr. Suman Banik,

C/O- Nani Gopal Banik,

Surya Sen Market, Maharaj Ganja Bazar,

P.S. East Agartala, P.O. Agartala,

Pin-799001, West Tripura.   .............Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

Axis Bank, 

Agartala Branch,(IFS Code- UTIB0000276),

Banik Tower, H.G. Basak Road,

P.S. West Tripura, Post Office Agartala. ..................Opposite Party.

 

 

 

     __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI RUHIDAS PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

Dr (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the Complainant : In Person.   

  

For the O.P.   : Mrs. Pushpita Chakraborty,

  Learned Advocate.

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON :  10.03.2021

 

 

 

 

J U D G M E N T

 

The Complainant's case in short is that the  complainant have a savings Account in the Axis Bank, Agartala Branch, Banik Tower, H.G. Basak Road, Agartala. It is stated by the complainant that on 15th November, 2019 at about 12:57:13 &12:57:54 hours two fraud transactions were done and debited Rs.5000/- and Rs.3500/- from his savings account against debit card no- 4173 4901 1182 7479 from another city. But in that time the ATM Cum Debit Card was in his own custody. Thereafter the complainant communicated and registered a complaint to customer care of Axis Bank on the same date  vide no- 56930886.  on 16th November, 2019 he went to the Axis Bank Ltd., Agartala  and gave a letter in regard this fraudulent transaction.  Then the Dealing Clerk instructed him to lodge FIR in the Police Station and accordingly he lodged the FIR vide no- 2019WAG303 on 16.11.2019.  it is also stated by the complainant that the said bank had credited Rs.5000/- and Rs/3500/- as temporary credit (feeeze) in favour of his savings account.  On 15 February,2020 he went to the said bank to know the status and steps taken about the said fraudulent transaction. Then the bank authorities instructed him to give a letter of reminder regarding the permanent credit of the said amount to his account. Accordingly he also submitted the said reminder to the said bank on 15.02.2020. on 18th march the complainant came to learn that the bank had debited Rs.8500/- from his savings account which was temporary credited to his account without any reason/intimation. On 21st May, 2020 bank issued him a reply letter  dated 21.05.2020 intimating him that his claim was rejected by the concerned insurance company, due to non-submission of the query documents within due time. It is also mentioned the complainant had another joint savings account in the same bank & branch in the name of his wife, Smt. Payel Banik and himself vide no- 914010046425200 and same type of  fraudulent transaction was also made against that joint savings account also on the same date i.e., on 15.11.2019 by debiting Rs.6000/- from another city. But in that case the said bank had credited the amount. Since the O.P. bank rejected the claim of the complainant he filed the instant complaint before this Commission for getting relief. 

 

2.  The Opposite party Axis Bank appeared and contested the case by filing written objection. In their written objection the O.P. have stated that the petition is not maintainable in its present form & nature and this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the dispute involved in the said petition. As such the complaint petition is liable to be rejected. It is also stated by the O.P. that the complainant has no locus standi to initiate the present proceeding and the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. O.P. denied the allegations made by the complainant. It is stated by the O.P. that the complaint is totally false & fabricated one and it is filed for illegal gain from the O.P. It is also stated by the O.P. that there is no specific cause of action to file the complaint petition as the O.P. in no way liable to refund the said amount as alleged by the complainant and the complainant filed this complaint with a malafide intention. The O.P. also submits that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the bank and thus prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

 

3.  POINTS TO BE DETERMINED -

  (i) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. towards the Complainant?

  (ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation/  relief as prayed for?

 

 

 DECISION AND REASONS THEREOF-

 

4. From the order dated 27.01.2021 it appears that the complainant was directed to submit his evidence by way of affidavit but complainant failed to adduce any evidence to substantiate his claim. On subsequent several dates complainant remained absent. So we decided to dispose of the case on merit. 

 

5. We have gone through the complaint petition filed without any affidavit. On the other hand O.P. did not admit the allegations. Rather O.P. specifically stated that there is no cause of action in the instant complaint. It is also stated that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.

 

6. As per summary procedure burden lies upon the complainant to prove his case by way of adducing evidence, but in the instant case, complainant failed to adduce any evidence inspite of giving him sufficient opportunity. The conduct of the complainant also speaks that he is not interested to proceed with the case. Since there is no admission on the part of the O.P., we are in the opinion that the complainant failed to prove his case. Accordingly the complaint is dismissed of for want of evidence.

Supply copy of the order to both the parties free of cost.                

 

Announced.

 

 

SRI R. PAL

PRESIDENT, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

Dr (SMT) B. PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.