Mr. Abdul Hamid Shaikh

S/O late Shaikh Abdul Mohit,

Of Village – Ghoraberia,

Post – Bhatora,

Dist Howrah, 711 303-------------------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANT.

-          Versus   -

Bank Manager,

ICICI Bank Ltd.

Mr. Subrata Deb Chandra,

Rosoi Court,

20, Sir R.N. Mukherjee Road,

Kolkata – 700 001------------------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTY.

                                                P   R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  Complainant Mr. Abdul Hamid Shaikh, by filing a petition  U/S 12 of the C .P.Act,

1986 (as amended up to date) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the O.P. to reimburse `10,000/- debited wrongfully, alongwith the payment of compensation for an amount of `50,000/- and litigation cost of `5,000/-.

2.                  Brief fact of the case is that complainant maintains one savings A/C with O.P. having A/C no. 000601536747 with ATM facility. On 21.11.2011 at about 8 a.m., complainant went to O.P.’s ATM counter situated at Howrah Station Basement to withdraw an amount of `10,000/-, although he put all necessary information’s for availing of such ATM facility for withdrawal of such `10,000/-, ATM machine did not respond and remit such amount. He thought that machine was not working properly and left the place after cancelling the transaction but after some time he received a mobile message which confirmed the withdrawl of above said `10,000/-from his account. As at that point of time, he was travelling by train to come home, on the next day, i.e. on 22.11.2011, he met manager of the O.P. requesting him to look in to the matter and manager assured him and asked him to meet after 3 days. And when the complainant met that manager again after 3 days, he asked the complainant to came after 7days. Ultimately on 28.11.2011, complainant lodged one G.D.E. being no 2014 dt. 28.11.2011 a vide annexure with Howrah govt. Railway Police Station. Even after that complainant went on meeting the Bank authority day after day with the same request, but no fruitful result came out Ultimately on 18.03.2013 vide annexure  dt. 18.03.2013 O.P. wrote him a letter confirming that `10,000/- was successfully withdrawn by the complainant as per their records. Even O.P. tried to collect video clippings but could not succeed. It is alleged by the complainant that O.P. did not enquire about his complaint being no. SR202048621 properly and deliberately they did not do proper justice to settle his grievance. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for aforesaid reliefs. Notice was served upon O.P. O.P. appeared and filed W/V.

DECISION  WITH   REASONS

      We have carefully gone through W/V filed by O.P. and noted its contents. Contending, interalia, O.P. has denied and disputed all material facts and allegations made out by the complainant in his complaint / petition. But specific plea of the O.P. is that on entering ATM card and PIN number by the complainant for withdrawal of `10,000/-, ATM machine gave him `10,000/- as the transaction was quite successful. For that O.P. has annexed the transaction details of that particular ATM counter held on 21.11.2011 at about 8 p.m., where from it is seen that against A/C no.000601536747, `10,000/- was withdrawn and debited from that A/C. O.P. has annexed several reported judgments. We have carefully gone through all those judgement. But here we take a pose to think our the entire issue. A common man, for such an amount of `10,000/-, would undergo so much trouble like frequently going to the manager of O.P. , lodging a G.D., lastly filing a case before this consumer Forum. Leaving aside his day to day work for maintaining livelihood, complainant has kept himself engaged for getting such `10,000/- reimbursed. It is our common knowledge that machine can go out of order at any point of time without giving any prior intimation. Now-a-days, it has become a very common problem with ATM cards. O.P. should have been far more careful about such allegations. O.P. even failed to produce any conclusive evidence to prove that complainant got the amount of `10,000/- from the ATM machine. Technological improvement does not support that consumer should be harassed and deprived of his genuine claim. O.Ps. negligent attitude has caused severe mental agony to the complainant which should not be allowed to be perpetuated. And we are of the opinion that O.P. is deficient in providing service  to the complainant. Accordingly, the case succeeds on contest.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  156 of 2013 ( HDF 156 of 2013 )  be  allowed on contest with   costs  against  the O.P. 

      That O.P. is directed to credit the complainant’s A/C being no. 00601536747 with an amount of `10,000/- within one month from this order. The complainant do get an award of `2000 /- as compensation and `500/- as litigation cost totaling `2500 which is to be paid by O.P. within one month from this order i.d. this amount shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till actual payment made to the complainant.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 ( Jhumki Saha )                         ( P. K. Chatterjee )                (T.K. Bhattacharya  )

 Member,                                     Member,                                President,

 C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                     C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                 C.D.R.F.,Howrah                                      

                                          .