DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 88 of 2019.

 

Smt. Bina Pani Saha,

D/O. Late Jogesh Ch. Saha,

W/O. Sri Pranab Goswami,

Near Ram Krishna Ashram,

Lalchhara, Khowai,

Presently residing at East Shibnagar Kalitala,

Agartala Tripura, Agartala College,

P.S.-East Agartala, P.O.-Shibnagar,

Pin-799004 ….................…........................................Complainant.

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

Axis Bank,

Represented by the Manager,

Banik Tower, H.G.B Road,

P.O.-Agartala, P.S.-West 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.

 

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA. 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the Complainant : Miss Leena Sarkar,

    Miss Nilanjana Roy,

    Advocates. 

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

  Advocate.                                                                                                                                  

  

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON: 29/04/2022.

J U D G M E N T

The Complainant Smt. Bina Pani Saha, set the law in motion by presenting the petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 complaining deficiency of service by the O.P. 

  The complainant's case in brief is that the Complainant opened one Savings Bank account bearing No.27601010017833 and also having one locker in her name in the year 2006 with the  O.P., the Branch Manager, Axis Bank, Banik Tower, H.G.B. Road, Agartala. In the month of January, 2018 she updated her savings account and found that Rs.35,000/-(Rupees Thirty five thousand) was withdrawn from her account and the said account was not withdrawn by the Complainant nor she has any knowledge regarding the said withdrawn. Thereafter, the Complainant has given a letter to the O.P. Bank on 17/06/2019 informing that Rs.35,000/- was withdrawn from her said account of which she has no knowledge and also stated in the letter to return the said amount to her but after receiving the letter the O.P did not take any step to recover the amount. But O.P. has replied to the Complainant vide leltter dated 20/06/2019 which was sent on 11/07/2019 and the Complainant did not get any result till today even after their reply. 

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the services of the O.P. the complainant filed this complaint praying for compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- on account of mental agony hardship suffered by her and also for direction upon the O.P. to refund Rs.35,000/- which has been fraudulently withdrawn from her account.

Hence this case. 

2. The O.P. has contested the case by filing a written statement denying any deficiency of service having been committed by them towards the Complainant. Regarding the alleged withdrawals for an amount of Rs.35,000/- from the account of the complainant, the O.P. has asserted that the withdrawals were made on account of disclosure of secret Paytm Wallet Password, Credit / Debit Card PIN and any other confidential information by the Complainant. The O.P. can not be held responsible for the alleged fraudulent withdrawals from the savings bank account of the Complainant. The O.P. Bank has supplied to the Complainant the details of the transactions as sought for by the Complainant and that the O.P. has also informed the Complainant that they were unable to refund the amount as the matter has not been dealt with by the O.P. Branch, Agartala.  

The O.P. has thus prayed for dismissal of the Complaint for the interests of justice. 

3. EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PARTIES:

    The complainant examined herself as P.W.1. She submitted her examination in chief by way of affidavit. She has produced 5 documents comprising 8 sheets under a Firisti dated 21/10/2019. The documents on identification have been marked as Exhibit – 1 Series. The complainant was cross examined by the O.P. side. 

On behalf of the O.P. one witness namely Mr. S. Ahmed, S/O. Md. Alluddin, Serving as Branch Head, AXIS Bank, Agartala Branch has been examined but no documentary evidence has been produced. 

 

4. POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:

Based on the contentions raised by both the parties in their pleadings and having regard to the evidence adduced by the complainant the following points cropped up for determination:

(I).   Whether there was deficiency of service on the part of the O.P.?

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

5.   ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES:

        We have heard arguments from both sides. At the time of argument, Learned Counsel of the Complainant submitted that the Complainant opened one savings account No. 27601010017833 in the year, 2006 along with one locker facility. In the month of January,2018 when pass book was up dated the Complainant found that Rs.35,000/- was debited from her account without her knowledge. Accordingly, she went to the Bank and asked the Manager regarding the debit amount but the Bank Manager misbehaved with her. Subsequently, Complainant came to know that the said amount was withdrawn through ATM Card where as she never withdrawn the said amount. Thereafter, Complainant visited the Bank several times and lastly on 17/06/2019 had sent one application to the Bank Manager informing the facts and also prayed to return the said amount but the Bank did not give any response. Learned Advocate further submitted that without her consent and blocking old ATM Card  Bank issued another ATM Card. So there is fraudulent activities done by the O.P. for which Complainant had suffered and now Complainant is entitled to get compensation from the O.P. 

                On the other hand Learned Counsel of the O.P. submitted that there is no fault on the part of the O.P. as well as there is no deficiency of service and complaint is liable to be dismissed. Learned Counsel of the O.P. submitted that Complainant made a prayer before the Bank to issue an ATM-CUM-DEBIT Card in favour of her and after observing all formalities Bank issued the Card. The amount which is in question was withdrawn by the Complainant using ATM Card. So, there is no question of deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. Learned Counsel of the O.P. further submitted that Complainant has failed to prove any deficiency of service against the O.P.                                                                                                                                       

6. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:

Both issues are taken up together for the convenience. 

    We have considered argument and submission of both sides as well as we have perused the complaint, written reply as well as evidences both oral and documentary. 

                  From the complaint petition as well as evidence adduced by the Complainant we found that Rs.7,900/- was debited four times on 21/09/2018 using ATM Card on the same day Rs.1,599/- & Rs.799/- were also debited using ATM Card. In cross examination, Complainant stated that she first came to learn about the missing of Rs.35,000/- in the month of October,2019. Thereafter, she verbally made complain to the Bank but did not make complaint in written.  

                  From the evidence of the O.P. we find that Complainant has whimsically filed the complaint petition against the O.P. From the evidence of the O.P. it is also found that the amount in question was withdrawn by the Complainant and there is no allegation of hacking of Bank Account. From the complaint petition we do not find that ever the Complainant lodged any FIR against illegal withdrawn of money from her account. Moreover, we find that Complainant did not inform the Bank in time.     

7. On overall appreciation of the evidence of both sides we do not find that any deficiency in service committed by the O.P. We are also in the opinion that Complainant failed to prove deficiency in service against the O.P. 

Hence the complaint is dismissed. No costs. 

Supply a certified copy of the judgment to both the parties free of cost. 

  Announced.

 

 

 

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

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.