IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Wednesday the 30th day of November, 2011
Filed on 27.06.2008
Present
1. Sri. Jimmy Korah (President)
2. Sri. K. Anirudhan (Member)
3. Smt. N. Shajitha Beevi (Member)
in
C.C.No.132/2008
between
Complainant :- | Opposite parties:- |
Sri. Prakash C.M. Kunnel Veedu, Kattoor P.O, Alappuzha. (By Adv. M.P.Manoj kumar, Alappuzha) | Axis Bank Ltd, Alappuzha Branch, Mullackal , Alappuzha Represented by its Branch Manager. (Adv. C.Parameswaran , Alappuzha) |
O R D E R
SRI.JIMMY KORAH (PRESIDENT)
The complainant case is that the complainant is the ATM card holder of the opposite party. On 30th May 2008, the complainant withdrew a total amount of Rs.49500/-(Rupees forty nine thousand and five hundred only ) by four terms. Thereafter on 2nd June 2008, the opposite party took Rs.15394/-(Rupees fifteen thousand three hundred and ninety four) from the complainant’s account. Further, the opposite party returned the complainant's cheque on the same date without proper reason. The opposite party over again on 16th June 2008 seized another amount of Rs.394/-(Rupees three hundred ninety four only ) from the complainant. The opposite party committed deficiency of service, and inflicted mental agony and harassment on the complainant. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant approached this Forum for compensation and relief.
2. On notice being served the opposite party turned up and filed version. The contention of the opposite party is that on the day when the complainant withdrew Rs.49500/(Rupees forty nine thousand five hundred only ) from his account, actually there was only Rs.34900/-(Rupees thirty four thousand and nine hundred only ) in the complainant's account. First of all, the complainant withdrew Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from his account. According to the opposite party, due to the malfunctioning of the machine, the withdrawal of the said amount was not recorded in it and the balance was shown again as Rs.34900/-(Rupees thirty four thousand and nine hundred only ). On the same day the complainant effected three more transactions withdrawing the entire amount of Rs.34900/-(Rupees thirty four thousand and nine hundred only ). In this manner, the complainant pulled out a total amount of Rs.49500/-(Rupees forty nine thousand and five hundred only ) from his account while in reality, there was Rs.34900/-(Rupees thirty four thousand and nine hundred only). Subsequent to thereof, the complainant effected remittance of a total amount of Rs.15500/-(Rupees fifteen thousand and five hundred only ) in his account. Thereupon, the opposite party, on 2nd June 2008 debited Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from the complainant's account, the amount which the complainant excessively withdrew from the opposite party bank. Thus, when the cheque for an amount of Rs.6380/-(Rupees six thousand and three hundred and eighty only ) was produced before the bank for encashment through clearing, the same was returned unpaid for want of sufficient funds, the opposite party contends. An amount of Rs.394/ (Rupees three hundred and ninety four only ) was debited from the complainant accounts towards return charge. The complainant allegation that the opposite party illegally got hold of Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from the complainant's account, therefore is not true. The complainant was well aware of the malfunctioning of the machine and the actual balance in his account, and his attempt was to take unwarranted leverage of the circumstance. The complaint is vexatious, and as such the same is to be dismissed with cost and compensation to the opposite party.
3. The complainant evidence consists of the testimony of the complainant and the documents Exbts A 1 to A2 were marked. The commission report was marked as Exbt C1. On the side the opposite party, its branch manager was examined as Rwl and the documents were marked as Exbts B 1 to B4.
4 . Taking into account, the contentions of the parties, the questions that crop up for consideration are:-
(a) Whether the opposite party effected illegitimate withdrawal of money from the complainant's account?
(b) Whether the opposite party's service is deficient?
(c) Whether the complainant is entitled to relief?
5. Concededly the complainant is the A TM Card holder of the opposite party bank Indisputably, on 30th May 2008 the complainant pulled out a total amount of Rs.49500/-(Rupees Forty nine thousand and five hundred only ) through four withdrawals from the opposite party bank. The complainant's case is that the opposite party on 2nd June 2008, without any basis debited Rs.15394/-(Rupees fifteen thousand and three hundred and ninety four only ) from the complainant's account. Thereafter, on the same day, the opposite party dishonored one of the complainant's cheque alleging insufficiency of funds in his account. Amazingly yet, the opposite party seized Rs.394/(Rupees three hundred and ninety four only ) from the complainant's account. The opposite party vehemently contends that the complainant on 30th May 2008, overdrew an amount of Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from his account. According to the opposite party, the said withdrawal of the amount was not recorded in the ATM consequent upon an uncommon mechanical defect in the system. To put it simply, the amount, the complainant withdrew was not deducted from the total amount available with the complainant's account. Bearing lively in mind, the contentions put forth by both the parties, we carefully went through the entire materials that formed the part of the record. A perusal of Exbt.Cl commission report shows that the complainant had overdrew Rs.15000/-. (Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from his account as alleged by the opposite parties. Thus even according to the opposite party, the complainant had pulled out the amount over and above what was available in his account not intentionally. Even if the commission report discloses so, no convincing materials have been brought before us to establish the finding of the as to the malfunctioning of the ATM. Admittedly, on 2nd June 2008 the complainant deposited an amount of Rs.15500/-(Rupees fifteen thousand and five hundred only ) with the opposite party. The opposite party, instantaneously seized upon the same and appropriated Rs.15000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only ) from the aforesaid Rs.15500/-(Rupees fifteen thousand and five hundred only ) without any intimation to the complainant. As a result, when the cheque was presented, there was no sufficient fund in the complainant's account to honor the same. Strangely, the opposite party debited Rs.394/-(Rupees threehundred and ninety four only ) towards cheque return charges. Interestingly as in the instant case, if it is assumed that there was pulling out of excess amount by the complainant, it is due to the mistake on the part of the opposite party, and there would have been little chance for the complainant to know the factum of his resultant overdrawing the amount, and in that case it was the bounden duty of the opposite party to intimate the complainant as to his erroneous withdrawals. On the other hand, the opposite party seemingly kept culpable silence and swooped on the amount the complainant deposited to honor the cheque the complainant issued. The opposite party not only dishonored the cheque, but imposed return charges on the complainant. As we have already observed, the opposite party pathetically failed to establish that the complainant has overdrawn the amount as alleged. It goes without saying that the practice of the opposite party is unfair and its service is absolutely deficient. Undoubtedly, the complainant is entitled to relief.
6. In the wake of what have been elaborated supra, opposite party is directed to hand back the complainant an amount of Rs.15394/-(Rupees fifteen thousand three hundred and ninety four only ) the opposite party debited from the complainant's account and procured as cheque return charge. The opposite party is also directed to pay an amount of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only ) as compensation to the complainant for the deficiency of service and for the harassment the opposite party inflicted on him. The opposite parties shall comply with the order of this Forum within 30 days of receipt of the same.
In the result, the complaint is allowed accordingly. No order as to compensation or cost.
Pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of November 2011.
Sd/- Sri.Jimmy Korah
Sd/-Sri.K. Anirudhan:
Sd/-Smt. N.Shajitha Beevi
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - Sri. Prakash .C.M ( Witness )
Ext. A1 - Axis Bank Statement
Ext.A2 - Axis Bank Statement
Ext.C1 - Inspection Report
Evidence of the Opposite parties:-
Ext.B1 - Statement of Axis Bank
Ext.B1 - Axis Bank Statement
Ext.B3 - Photocopy Relationship form for savings account and fixed deposit
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite Parties/S.F.
Typed by:- sh/-
Compared by:-
