Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/61/2013

Mr. B.Thiyagarajan, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bank Of India. - Opp.Party(s)

C.Saravanan

25 Apr 2019

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 13.02.2013

                                                                          Date of Order : 25.04.2019

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 3.

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

TR. R. BASKARKUMARAVEL, B.Sc., L.L.M., BPT., PGDCLP. : MEMBER

 

C.C. No.61/2013

DATED THIS THURSDAY THE 25^TH DAY OF APRIL 2019

 

Mr. B. Thiyagarajan,

S/o. Mr. K. Balu,

No.115/83, Third Street,

SKP Puram,

Greenways Road,

Chennai – 600 028.                                                   .. Complainant.                                                    ..Versus..

 

The Branch Manager,

Bank of India,

No.33/3, First Main Road,

Gandhi Nagar,

Adyar,

Chennai – 600 020.                                                    ..  Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the complainant      : M/s. M. Venkataramanan & others

Counsel for the opposite party   : M/s. S. Sathiyanarayanan

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 pray to pay a refund a sum of Rs.4,089/- which was transacted through the lost card and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service, loss of good faith with cost of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant.

1.    The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant submits that he is maintaining SB account No.801010110000152 with the opposite party and on 03.08.2012, the complainant had lost his ATM card bearing No.405238800050555.  On 04.08.2012, the complainant gave a letter intimating that his ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 has been lost and requested the opposite party to block said ATM card and issue a new ATM cum debit card.   The complainant submits that the opposite party also accepted the request of the complainant and informed him that the ATM card has been blocked and new card will be issued within 2 weeks.  The complainant submits that to his shock and surprise on 22.08.2012, the complainant received a message that a sum of Rs.111.24/- has been transacted through the ATM card which has been lost.  Similarly, on the same day, the complainant received another message for a transaction of Rs.3,978/- through the said ATM card which has been lost.  The complainant submits that on 24.08.2012, he gave a complaint with the opposite party informing the details of transaction dated:22.08.2012 since, the bank was on strike two days (i.e. 22^nd & 23^rd August 2012).  The complainant submits that the opposite party has not taken any steps either to refund the amount or blocking the ATM card and issuing new card.  Hence the complainant issued a legal notice dated 31.10.2012 for which, the opposite party sent a reply dated:15.11.2012 but not come forward to settle the demands of the complainant.  

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by opposite party is as follows:-

The opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and put the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The opposite party states that the complainant is a customer of the Adyar Branch of the opposite party and informed that his ATM card has been lost and requested for blocking the same.   The opposite party states that on perusal of records, the opposite party understood that the complainant holds 3 ATM cards.  The opposite party requested the complainant to mention the number of the ATM card which was said to be lost.  But the complainant failed to provide the number of the lost ATM card and left the Branch informing that he will bring the details.   The opposite party states that the complainant contacted the Toll Free number for blocking the card, there he was advised to furnish the number of the lost ATM card and in the absence of the card number the card cannot be blocked.  The opposite party states that the complainant has miserably failed to furnish the acknowledgment number etc.   The opposite party has accepted the request and informed the complainant that the ATM card has been blocked and the new ATM card will be delivered within 2 weeks.  The opposite party states that the complainant vide his letter dated:24.08.2012 informed the opposite party that a sum of Rs.111.24/- and Rs.3,978/- has been debited from his account and requested for reimbursement of the amount.   The opposite party states that the complainant was having 3 ATM cards and due to non-furnishing the details of the lost ATM card and non co-operation of the complainant, the opposite party was unable to process further to block the ATM card.  There is no negligence or carelessness on their part.   Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A7 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite party is filed and document Ex.B1 alone is marked on the side of the opposite party.  

4.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to refund a sum of Rs.4,089/- transacted through the ATM lost card by the complainant as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service with cost of Rs.25,000/- as prayed for?

 

5.      On point:-

The opposite party filed his written arguments. The complainant has not filed any written arguments and not turned up to advance any oral arguments also.  Perused the records namely; the complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The complainant pleaded and contended that he is maintaining SB account No.801010110000152 with the opposite party and on 03.08.2012, the complainant had lost his ATM card bearing No.405238800050555.  On 04.08.2012, the complainant gave a letter intimating that his ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 has been lost and requested the opposite party to block the said ATM card and issue a new ATM cum debit card as per Ex.A1.   Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party also accepted the request of the complainant and informed him that the ATM card has been blocked and new card will be issued within 2 weeks.  But to the shock and surprise on 22.08.2012, the complainant received a message that a sum of Rs.111.24/- has been transacted through the ATM card which has been lost.  Similarly, on the same day, the complainant received another message for a transaction of Rs.3,978/- through the said ATM card which has been lost.  Ex.A2 is the bank pass book showing the details of transactions.   Further the contention of the complainant is that on 24.08.2012, he gave a complaint as per Ex.A3 with the opposite party informing the details of transaction dated:22.08.2012 since, the bank was on strike on 22^nd & 23^rd August 2012.  The opposite party could not take any steps after receiving complaint.  Further the contention of the complainant is that the opposite party has not taken any steps either to refund the amount or blocking the ATM card and issuing new card. On the other hand, the opposite party issued letter dated:07.08.2012 as per Ex.A4 without any substantial proof.  Since, the opposite party has not taken suitable steps, the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice dated 31.10.2012 as per Ex.A6 for which, the opposite party sent a reply dated:15.11.2012 as per Ex.A7 with untenable contentions proves the deficiency in service.   The complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.4,089/- the amount transacted after the due intimation of loss of ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 with compensation.

6.     The contention of the opposite party is that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.  Equally, the complainant has not proved any deficiency on the part of the opposite party.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A1 to Ex.A3, it is apparently clear that immediately after the loss of ATM card bearing No.405238800050555, due intimation was given to the opposite party to request them to block the ATM card.  Thereafter on 22.08.2012, there was a transaction in the bank account through the alleged ATM card which was lost proves that the opposite party has not taken suitable steps to block the ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 alleged to be lost on 03.08.2012.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the customer of the Adyar Branch who visited on 04.08.2012 to block his ATM card without specifying the number since the complainant had 3 ATM cards.  But on a careful perusal of Ex.A1, it is very clear that the complainant requested to block the ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 proves that the opposite party’s allegation is false.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant has informed the opposite party that he had contacted the toll free number for blocking the card.  The complainant also has not furnished the number of the ATM card alleged to be lost.   But as per Ex.A1, due intimation of the loss of ATM card bearing No.405238800050555 was given to the opposite party.  Further the contention of the opposite party is that the complainant miserably failed to furnish the acknowledgment number etc.  But in this case, the complainant after the alleged loss of ATM card, due intimation given relating to the transaction happened by way of Ex.A3.   There is no iota of evidence in this case to prove that the opposite party has taken suitable steps at the relevant point of time.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.4,089/- being amount transacted through the lost ATM card with a compensation Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/-.

In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite party is directed to refund a sum of Rs.4,089/- (Rupees Four thousand and eighty nine only) being amount transacted through the lost ATM card and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above  amounts shall be payable  within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 25^th day of April 2019. 

 

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.A1	04.08.2012	Copy of letter given to the opposite party to block the card
Ex.A2		Copy of bank pass book
Ex.A3	24.08.2012	Copy of letter given to the opposite party regarding the transaction through the lost card
Ex.A4	07.08.2012	Copy of letter by the opposite party in regard of New ATM card
Ex.A5	07.08.2012	Copy of the cover received by the complainant which carried the PIN number
Ex.A6	31.10.2012	Copy of legal notice to the opposite party
Ex.A7	15.11.2012	Copy of reply notice to the opposite party

 

OPPOSITE PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:-

Ex.B1

15.11.2012

Copy of reply to legal notice

 

 

MEMBER                                                                  PRESIDENT