In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad
Berhampore, Murshidabad.
Case No. C.C/82 /2015
Date of filing: 30/05/2016 Date of Final Order: 17/10/2016
Wasim Raja
Vill. Islampur Azad Pally, P.O.& P.S.- Islampur.
Dist- Murshidabad, Pin.-742304. (W.B.) ……………………………... Complainant
- Vs-
Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda,
Islampur Branch. Islampur,.
Dist.- Murshidabad. Pin.-742304. (W.B.) ………….….………… Opposite Party
Before: Hon’ble President, Anupam Bhattacharyya.
Hon’ble Member, Samaresh Kumar Mitra.
FINAL ORDER
Samaresh KumarMitra,Member.
This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s. 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for an order imposing penalty of Rs.100/- per day from 31.12.2015 till the date of final order for the Interest on RBI guidelines and other cost upon the OP.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that due to unsuccessful debit from the account he did not get sum of Rs.10, 000/- from the ATM Counter on 4.12.15 of Bank of Baroda, Islampur Branch.
Despite receiving notice the sole OP did not turn up so the proceedings run ex-parte against him.
The complainant also files evidence –on- affidavit where he stated that on 04.12.2015 Rs.10,000/- has been debited from his account but he has not received that money. He complained to the Bank Authority and got Rs.10, 000/- on 22.12.2015. On 31.12.2015 Rs.10, 000/- has been debited again and he complained to the Bank Authority but then no result has been made. The manager informed that debit on 31.12.2015 has been successful and in his Passbook Rs.10, 000/- has lien. But after filing the case before the Consumer Forum, he has got Rs.10, 000/-. But as per RBI rules & regulations he will get compensation amounting to Rs.100/- per day.
Argument as advanced by the complainant heard in full.
From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.
ISSUES/POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Whether the Complainant ‘Wasim Raja’ is a ‘Consumer’ of the Opposite Party?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
- Whether the O.Ps carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
- Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
DECISION WITH REASONS
In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.
(1).Whether the Complainant ‘Wasim Raja’ is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?
From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant is a consumer of the OP as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as he is maintaining a savings bank account so he is entitled to get service from the OP.
(2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
(3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
The case of the complainant is that the OP debited a sum of Rs.10000/- on 4.12.2015 then the complainant filed a complaint before the OP then the OP credited sum of Rs.10000/- on 22.12.2015 and thereafter the same amount was debited on 31.12.2015. The complainant again lodged a complaint in that regard but no effective measure taken by the OP, getting no alternative the complainant lodged a complaint before the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Murshidabad RO, who on his turn scheduled mediation in his office but it became futile due to apathetic attitude of the OP. As per advice of the Assistant Director, Consumer Affairs & Fair Business Practices, Murshidabad RO the complainant preferred the recourse of this Forum for redressal praying for remedy as prayed in the prayer portion of the complaint. Despite receiving notice the OP did not turn up so the proceeding run ex-parte against the OP. the complainant filed evidence on affidavit and advanced ex-parte argument in favour of his complaint.
After perusing the complaint petition, evidence on affidavit and documents in the record and hearing the arguments it appears that complainant is maintaining a savings bank account before the OP and while operating ATM machine a sum of RS.10000/- withdrawn from his account but he could not avail the said money then he lodged a complaint before the OP who in his turn credited the sum of Rs.10000/-in the account of the complainant on 22.12.2015 and later on debited the same amount on 31.12.2015 and reserved a sum of Rs.10000/- as lien . Then the complainant filed a complaint stating his grievances but of no result. The Xerox copy of account details shows that the amount which is kept as lien released on 21.04.2016. so the complainant will get compensation at the rate of Rs.100/- per days delay. The complainant produced a Xerox copy of frequently asked questions regarding the transaction of ATM/ White Label ATM answered by Reserve Bank of India, updated on29.01.2016 in which the question No.16. Are the customers eligible for compensation for delays beyond 7 working days? The answer is Yes, Effective from July1, 2011, banks have to pay compensation of Rs.100/- per day for delays in re crediting the amount beyond 7 working days from the date of receipt of complaint for failed ATM transactions. The compensation has to be credited to the account of the customer without any claim being made by the customer. If the complaint is not lodged within 30 days of transaction the customer is not entitled for any compensation for delay in resolving his/her complaint. The complaints lodged by the complainant before the OP on 6.02.2016 & 28.3.2016 copy of which has annexed with the complaint petition but it is unchallenged one due to absence of the OP. So relying on the complaints and frequently asked questions regarding the transaction of ATM/ White Label ATM answered by Reserve Bank of India, updated on29.01.2016 we are in a considered opinion that the OP was under obligation to credit the compensation to the account of the customer without any claim being made by the customer. But the OP failed to provide the compensation to this complainant which tantamount to deficiency of service on the part of the OP.
So we may safely conclude that the OP is under liability to pay compensation to this complainant amounting to Rs.10400/- for 104 days delay @ Rs100/- per day.
4). whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant could able to prove his case and the Opposite Party is under liability to pay any compensation for deficiency of service.
-
Hence it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the Opposite party with a litigation cost amounting to Rs.4000/-.
The OP is directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs.10400/ for 104 days delay @ Rs.100/- per day within 45 days from the date of this order.
At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party shall pay cost @ Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 45 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the fund of “Consumer Legal Aid Account”.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by registered post forthwith, for information & necessary action.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Member, President.
