Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/960/2016

Om Parkash - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, Axis Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

10 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

 

                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/960/2016
Date of Institution	:	18/10/2016
Date of Decision	:	10/05/2018

 

Om Parkash son of Late Sh. Bhagwati Verma, Resident of House No. 5922, Maloya Colony, U.T. Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

V E R S U S

Branch Manager, AXIS Bank Limited, SCO 139-142, Sector 9-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.

……Opposite Party

CORAM :	RATTAN SINGH THAKUR	PRESIDENT
	SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

                                                               

       

PRESENT:	:	Complainant in person.
	:	Sh. Saurav Goyal, Counsel for Opposite Party.

Per Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member

1.         The facts of the consumer complaint, in brief, are that the Complainant, who has been maintaining Savings Bank Account No. 3020100127936 with the Opposite Party and was issued ATM Card for facilitating withdrawals from the said account, used his ATM card on 25.04.2013 for withdrawal of Rs.5200/- from the Punjab National Bank, Maloya Colony, Chandigarh and on 26.03.2016 for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- from the ATM of AXIS Bank located at Sunny Enclave, Kharar, District Mohali, however, on both the occasions/dates although amounts were not dispensed by the ATM, yet the same were debited from Complainant’s aforesaid account. The matter was accordingly taken up with the Opposite Party, who assured to credit the aforesaid amounts in the Complainant’s account. However, when the grievance of the Complainant was not redressed, he got served a legal notice dated 01.08.2016 upon the Opposite Party, but to no success. Alleging that the aforesaid act amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         Notice of the complaint was sent to Opposite Party seeking its version of the case.  
3.         The Opposite Party in its written statement has not disputed the factual matrix of the case. However, it has been averred that as per the Electronic Journal Log/Printer, the Complainant has successfully withdrawn the disputed cash amounts of Rs.20,000/- and Rs.5,200/- therefore there is no liability of whatsoever nature against the OP-Bank. Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on its part, Opposite Party has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4.         Controverting the allegations contained in the written statement and reiterating the pleadings in the Complaint, the Complainant filed the rejoinder
5.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 
6.         We have gone through the entire evidence and heard the arguments addressed by the Complainant in person and Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party.
7.         The main grievance of the Complainant is that on two occasions, after insertion of debit card in the ATM the cash was not dispensed. On first occasion i.e. on 25.04.2013, the Complainant had inserted the debit card in the ATM of Punjab National Bank whereas he is holder of debit card of the Axis Bank. The Opposite Party Bank took up the matter with the Punjab National Bank who in turn intimated that the transaction was successful and no excess cash was found on 25.04.2013. On the second occasion i.e. on 26.03.2016, the Complainant again had used his debit card to withdraw Rs.20,000/- from ATM of Opposite Party located at Sunny Enclave, Kharar, District Mohali and as per the Complainant the ATM failed to dispense the cash amount of Rs.20,000/-. After lodging the Complaint, the same was investigated by the Opposite Party and found that the said transaction was successful and cash of Rs.20,000/- was successfully withdrawn by the ATM card holder. Further, on perusal of the photographs Annexure R-6 placed on record by the Opposite Party, it is evident that the ATM holder had successfully withdrawn the sum of Rs.20,000/- from the ATM of the OP-Bank vide Transaction No.8650 at 11.52 A.M. on 26.03.2016.  Thus, we find that the whole gamut of facts and circumstances leans towards the side of the Opposite Party. The case is lame of strength and therefore, liable to be dismissed.
8.         For the reasons recorded above, we do not find any shred of evidence to prove any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party. Consequently, the Consumer Complaint fails and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.    
9.         The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

Announced                        

10.05.2018

                                 Sd/-

(RATTAN SINGH THAKUR)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(SURJEET KAUR)

MEMBER

      

                           Sd/-

 (SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER

“Dutt”