Delhi

North East

RBT/CC/162/2024

AMIT MITTAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

AXUS BANK LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

02 Apr 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

RBT/Complaint Case No.162/24                                   

In the matter of:

 

 

	Sh. Amit Mittal S/o Sh. Raj Kumar Mittal R/o C 3/11, Krishna Nagar, Delhi 110051	Complainant
	Versus
	Axis Bank Ltd. Through its Manager, Branch Geeta Colony, Delhi-110051   Axis Bank Ltd., The Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer Head Office: Corporate Centre, Worli Mumbai 400001   Bank of Baroda Through its Manager Bank of Baroda, Branch Jheel, Delhi	Opposite Parties

 

 

CORAM:

Surinder Kumar Sharma, President

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

Adarsh Nain, Member

ORDER

 

Anil Kumar Bamba, Member

1. The case of the Complainant as revealed from the record is that the Complainant is having saving account with Opposite Party No.1 vide account no. 91601004735595. On 06.08.19 Complainant did transaction of Rs. 90,000/- online through his account to bank account of Milvirtan Exports Pvt. Ltd. vide account no. 21380200000513 in Bank of Baroda, Branch Jheel, Delhi/ Opposite Party No.3. However, by mistake of the Complainant as informed by the Complainant to Opposite Party No.1 vide letter dated 21.09.20 amount was transferred to account no. 21380200000514. Thereafter Complainant made complaint to customer care of Opposite Party No.1 and 2 but Complainant did not get any response from Opposite Parties. The Complainant again lodged complaint to Opposite Party No.2 on 21.09.20 as well as Opposite Party No.3 bank as advised by Opposite Party No.1 but Complainant did not get reply. It is stated that Complainant had various complaints and also sent emails to Opposite Party. The Complainant had made various visits to Opposite Party No.1 as well as office of Opposite Party No.3. In February 2023 Opposite Party flatly refused to redress the grievance.
2. In our considered opinion, there is no deficiency in service on behalf of Opposite Parties as the Complainant himself inadvertently transferred the amount into other account. Therefore, the present complaint is not maintainable before the Commission and liable to be dismissed on this ground. Hence, the complaint is dismissed.  
3. Order announced on 02.04.24.

Copy of this order be given to the Complainant free of cost

File be consigned to Record Room.

(Anil Kumar Bamba)	(Adarsh Nain)	(Surinder Kumar Sharma)
(Member)	(Member)	(President)