Order by:
Smt.Aparana Kundi, Member
1. The complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that he is having account No.913010053801777 with Opposite Party No.2 Bank. Further alleges that on account of some medical reimbursement, on 14.07.2021, Star Health & Insurance Company has reimbursed the amount of Rs.6013/- to the complainant in his account duly maintained with Opposite Party No.2 Bank through NEFT and similarly, on 15.07.2021 another amount of Rs.6013/- was also credited in the account of the complainant regarding the remaining amount of medi claim lodged by the complainant with Insurance Company. On 17.07.2021 the complainant intends to make a payment from the said account from UPI App through the debit card, said debit card shown insufficient balance in his account. On enquiry from Opposite Party No.2 bank it was explained that an entry of Rs.6013/- was made by the Star Insurance Company on 15.07.2021 wrongly which was reserved/ retained by the Opposite Parties without any intimation to the complainant which amounts not only deficiency in service rather mal practice on the part of the Opposite Parties. Thereafter, the complainant made so many requests and made correspondence with the Opposite Parties, but of no avail. In this way, said conduct of the Opposite Parties clearly amounts to deficiency in service and as such, the Complainant is left with no other alternative but to file the present complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.
- The Opposite Parties may be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental tension, harassment and agony suffered by the complainant.
- An amount of Rs.50,000/- on account of deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
- An amount of Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
- Or any other relief to which this District Consumer Commission may deem fit be also granted.
2. Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing the written version on the ground inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable; that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. It is submitted that true facts are that an amount of Rs.6013/- has been credited in the account of the complainant through HDFC Bank through NEFT on 14.07.2021 and due to some technical defect in the system, same amount of Rs.6013/- has been credited again from the bank on 15.07.2021 and this amount was sent by Star Health Insurance Company and the complainant is entitled only the medical claim from Star Health Insurance worth Rs.6013/- and not double of the amount. When this fact came to the notice of the Opposite Parties, they made lien on the amount of Rs.6013/- which has been wrongly credited in the account of the complainant as the complainant refused to sign the credit/ debit voucher for the reversal of the said double entry. In light of these facts, only an amount of Rs.6013/- which has been wrongly credited in the account of the complainant twice and the complainant is entitled only one amount of Rs.6013/- and second amount of Rs.6013/- was kept under lien and said amount has to be returned to HDFC Bank as per the Banking rules and as per the instructions of the Reserve Bank of India and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Remaining facts mentioned in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint was made.
3. In order to prove his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C10 and closed his evidence.
4. On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Ajay Goyal, Branch Head Ex.OP/1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP/2 to Ex.Op5 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and gone through the documents placed on record.
6. During the course of arguments, ld.counsel for the Complainant as well as ld.counsel for Opposite Parties have mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint as well as in the written statements respectively. We have perused the rival contentions of the parties and also gone through the record on file.
7. It is not denial of the Opposite Parties-Bank that the complainant has saving bank account with them. It is also not denied that the amount of Rs.6013/- has duly been credited in the account of the complainant and this amount has been sent by Star Health Insurance Company on account of some medical reimbursment. The case of the complainant is that the said Star Health Insurance Company has sent him Rs.6013/- twice on account of medical reimbursement, but the complainant has not arrayed said insurance company as necessary party who could truly clear the facts regarding the double entry of Rs.6013/- credited by the Opposite Parties bank to the account of the complainant. On the other hand, the case of the Opposite Parties is that an amount of Rs.6013/- has been credited in the account of the complainant through HDFC Bank through NEFT on 14.07.2021 and due to some technical defect in the system, same amount of Rs.6013/- has been credited again from the bank on 15.07.2021 and this amount was sent by Star Health Insurance Company and the complainant is entitled only the medical claim from Star Health Insurance worth Rs.6013/- and not double of the amount. When this fact came to the notice of the Opposite Parties, they made lien on the amount of Rs.6013/- which has been wrongly credited in the account of the complainant as the complainant refused to sign the credit/ debit voucher for the reversal of the said double entry. In light of these facts, only an amount of Rs.6013/- which has been wrongly credited in the account of the complainant twice and the complainant is entitled only one amount of Rs.6013/- and second amount of Rs.6013/- was kept under lien and said amount has to be returned to HDFC Bank as per the Banking rules and as per the instructions of the Reserve Bank of India, but to disprove this factum of the Opposite Parties-Bank, the complainant has failed to prove and produce any iota of evidence. As such, in the absence of any such document to disprove the contention of the Opposite Parties, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we found no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and hence, the instant complaint stands dismissed. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.
Announced in Open Commission.
