Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/16/188

Subhash Chand - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bank of Baroda - Opp.Party(s)

M.S.Sethi Adv.

14 Jun 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, LUDHIANA.

 

Consumer Complaint No. 188 of 09.03.2016

Date of Decision            :   14.06.2016

 

Subhash Chand aged 41 years s/o Jagat Ram r/o C/o Munjal Castings, Indl.Area B, Ludhiana.

….. Complainant

                                                         Versus

Bank of Baroda, Indl.Area-B, Partap Chowk, Distt. Ludhiana through authorized signatory.

…Opposite party

 

          (Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

QUORUM:

SH.G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

MRS. BABITA, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant                      :        Sh.M.S.Sethi, Advocate          

For OP                           :        Ex-parte

 

PER G.K.DHIR, PRESIDENT

 

1.                Complainant holds salary-cum-saving account No.01040100021593 with Op. ATM Card bearing No.402985022961901 has been issued against this saving account and the same is operated by the complainant occasionally. On 30.6.2015, the complainant received mobile message qua withdrawal of Rs.7322.80P at 10:00 PM, despite the fact that the complainant was out of station at that time. Complainant visited OP on 1.7.2015 and the dealing official disclosed the complainant as if the said withdrawal has taken place against use of ATM Card. However, said official refused to provide more information and as such, complainant sent written complaint on 2.7.2015. Thereafter, despite various oral and written requests including email communications, no action taken qua illegal withdrawal transaction referred above and that is why earlier consumer complaint No.540 dated 11.9.2015 was filed before this Forum. In that complaint, counsel for the OP suffered statement on 12.12.2015 for settling the claim of the complainant within 20 days. In view of that statement of counsel for OP, complainant withdrew the complaint by reserving the right to file fresh one in case of need. OP failed to settle the claim as per suffered statement of counsel for OP and that is why, by pleading deficiency  in service and adoption of unfair trade practice, this complaint filed for seeking refund of Rs.7322.80P along with interest @12%. Compensation for mental harassment of Rs.25,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5500/- more claimed.

2.                Notice of the complaint issued to the OP, but none appeared for OP after sending of the notice through registered post. Neither AD nor registered cover received back served or unserved and as such, after lapse of period of 30 days, presumption of due service drawn and OP was proceeded against ex-parte.

3.                Complainant in ex-parte evidence tendered his affidavit Ex.CA1 along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6 and thereafter, his counsel closed the evidence.

4.                Written arguments not submitted. But oral arguments alone addressed by the counsel for complainant and those were heard. Records gone through carefully.

5.                 Perusal of Ex.C1, the copy of order dated 12.12.2015 passed in Complaint No.540 of 11.9.2015 titled as Subhash Chander vs. Bank of Baroda reveals that Sh.Ashok Kumar, Advocate on behalf of OP suffered statement that account of the complainant will be settled within 20 days from that day by referring the matter to the Head Office. In view of that recorded statement of counsel for OP, complainant suffered statement for withdrawing the earlier complaint by reserving his right to file the fresh complaint in case of need. So, orders were passed in the National Lok Adalat on 12.12.2015 itself to the effect that OP will settle the claim of the complainant within 20 days w.e.f.12.12.2015, failing which, complainant in case of need can file fresh complaint. Even after lapse of 20 days, complainant has not heard anything from OP and as such, virtually the claim of the complainant not settled despite undertaking given by counsel for OP through recorded statement of 12.12.2015. So, deficiency in service on the part of OP certainly is there because claim of the complainant required to be settled by 2.1.2016. This complaint filed on 9.3.2016 after waiting for the settlement of claim as per undertaking of counsel for OP on 12.12.2015. Even after undertaking given by counsel for OP, account of the complainant has not been settled as per the term of award passed in National Lok Adalat Ex.C1 and as such, certainly complainant has suffered mental agony and tension, due to which, he is entitled for reasonable compensation along with costs of litigation.

6.                Ex.C2 is the copy of letter written by the complainant to Branch Manager of OP bank for complaining of illegal withdrawal of Rs.7322.80P from his account. Even complainant sent letter Ex.C3 to OP bank for claiming that though as per intimation received from the bank, ATM transaction for withdrawal of amount in question took place on 30.6.2015, but in fact the said ATM was in the pocket of the complainant. Even through letter Ex.C3 and email massage Ex.C5, complainant intimated OP bank as if he has not used the ATM Card qua the disputed transaction. Request was made for initiating action at earliest, but to no effect and as such, in view of contents of these letters Ex.C3 and Ex.C5 along with contents of affidavit Ex.CA1 of complainant, there remains no dispute that complaint qua illegal withdrawal of ATM transaction was lodged by the complainant at earliest, but action not taken by the OP despite undertaking of counsel for OP in the previous complaint. As counsel for OP himself undertook to settle the claim, but the same has not been settled and as such      the same itself reflects as if withdrawal of Rs.7322.80P took place from the account of the complainant without use of ATM Card by him. So, certainly, complainant entitled for refund of illegal withdrawn amount of Rs.7322.80P with interest @8% p.a. w.e.f.2.1.2016 till payment. Date 2.1.2016 is chosen by keeping in view the contents of Ex.C1 discussed in detail above.

7.                Therefore, as a sequel of the above discussion, complaint allowed ex-parte in terms that OP will refund Rs.7322.80Paise with interest @8% per annum w.e.f.02.01.2016 till payment. Compensation for mental harassment of Rs.2000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.1500/- more allowed in favour of the complainant and against OP. Order be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Copies of order be supplied to the parties free of costs as per rules. 

8.                File be indexed and consigned to record room.

                                                            

                      (Babita)                                     (G.K. Dhir)

            Member                                        President

Announced in Open Forum

Dated:14.06.2016

Gurpreet Sharma.