IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JAJPUR.

                                                                      Present:  1.Shri Biraja Prasad Kar, President,

                                                                                      2.Sri Pitabas Mohanty, Member,

                                                                                      3.Miss Smita Ray, Lady Member.

Dated the 2nd day of December,2014.

C. C. Case No.21 of 2014

Prasant Kumar Kar, S/O Panu charan kar

At. Korabandi  P.O-  Ragadi

P.S. Korei (Jajpur )

Dist.- Jajpur.                                                                                                     ……………..Complainant .                                                                                              

                        (Versus)

1. Branch Manager, Bank of India, Ragadi branch ,At/P.O. Ragadi

   Dist.Jajpur.

2. Regional Manager,  Bank of  India,Bhubaneswar Zone ,

    At. Star House 1/1 DHR,Jayadev Bihar ,Nayapalli,Bhubaneswar.

                                                                                                                               …………Opp.Parties.

For the Complainant:                    Sri  A.K.Pani, Advocate.

For the Opp. Parties                    Sri   Jagannath Pati,Advocate.

                                                                                                     Date of order    :    02. 12.2014.

SHRI  BIRAJA  PRASAD KAR, PRESIDENT.

                        The present complainant has filed this dispute against the O.Ps. with the allegation that a sum of Rs.20,500/- has been withdrawn illegally from his saving bank account  No.510410100004588  on 24.12.13 . The complainant put forth his grievances before the O.Ps. but the O.Ps. turned a deaf ear to it. Hence, the complainant has filed this dispute alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. and prayed in the complaint petition to direct the O.Ps. to credit the missing amount of Rs.20,500/- in the S.B account of the complainant and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards deficiency and mental agony.

                        On being noticed the O.Ps. have appeared through their advocate refuting the allegations made in the complaint petition and inter alia pleaded that the present petitioner is one of the customer of the Bank of India,Ragadi Branch having a savings account bearing No.510410100004588 and he is operating the same as individual capacity. More over on dt.14.01.14 the petitioner has submitted an application before the O.P. no.1 with an allegation that a sum of Rs.20,500/- has been withdrawn from his account on dt.24.12.13 by way of 08

number of withdrawals. More over on that day the petitioner had requested the O.P. no.1 to reverse the amount to his account as the same amount has been debited wrongly. After such approach the O.P. had verified the account and found that by using the ATM/DEBIT card the entire alleged amount has been withdrawn from the account of the petitioner and without any further delay the O.P no.1 requested the petitioner to submit an application for reversal of the FAILED ATM TRANSACTIONS  and as per the request the petitioner had  filed the application by giving the details of the transactions and after receiving the same the O.P no.1 had forwarded the same to the CARD PRODUCT DEPARTMENT,ZONAL OFFICE, BANK OF INDIA,BHUBANESWAR  and requested the IT Department  to enquire the matter as the said amount has been missing from the ATM. More over it is not the out of place to mention here that on dt.25.01.2014  the petitioner had submitted another application before the O.P. no.1 on saying that he had contacted the Bhubaneswar police as the amount had been withdrawn by a person in fraud manner residing at Bhubaneswar and the police  required this application on which the bank seal is very much essential so that the police can move forward for recovery of the amount, accordingly the O.P. no.1 after received the application and after affixing the bank seal given the copy of the application to the petitioner.

                        After receiving the report and the application from the petitioner the IT department of the bam of India enquired about the missing of the amount and after due verification the IT authority on dt.16.04.14 given a written report to the O.P. no.1 that except the transaction of Rs.3,000.00/ all the other transactions  were successful transactions and the bank is not in a position to return the other amount and more over in that letter the IT authority and the HR department of the Zonal office directed the O.P. no.1 to advice the petitioner to file a FIR for wrongful use of the ATM card. After receiving the letter the O.P no.1 had intimated this fact to the petitioner . After such verification of the transactions the bank authority reversed a sum of Rs.3000.00/ and the same has been intimated to the petitioner by the CARD PRODUCT DEPARTMENT vide letter dt.26.03.14 where it has been mentioned that the amount has been debited by way of ATM transactions of the petitioner towards the payment of the AIRTEL phone bill and the same has been  reversed by the bank. More over if this court will verify the documents will found that like the petitioner other persons were reversed the amount from the AIRTEL towards their telephone bill.

                        It is also further pleaded that the amount which has been withdrawn from the account of the petitioner by using the ATM/ DEBIT card has been duly reflected in the bank statement of the account of the petitioner. More specifically if this court will verify the statement will found that the fake transactions were done by one company namely

 “ ALL THE TRANSACTIONS DONE WITH THIS MERCHANT WILL APPEAR ON YOUR CREDIT CARD STATEMENT AS

the bank has never committed any deficiency of service any manner till date rather the bank manager O.P.no.1 has took prompt steps after getting the information from the petitioner and took the effective measures by filing the application for reverse of the amount and after due verification the O.P.no.1 has also reversed  one transaction of the petitioner in this context it is crystal clear that the O.p no.1has proved her bonafideness and absolutely there is no question of deficiency of service or any latches committed by the bank till date. In this circumstances it is well established that whatever allegations made in the petition is false and fabricated one and the petitioner deliberately dragged the bank authority to the dispute without any sufficient reason more specifically when the petitioner aware of the fact that the alleged merchant is responsible for these misshapen and he has took away the amount of the petitioner by using the secret number of the petitioners ATM card, in this context it is quite improbable to say that the bank is responsible for these episodes and the bank has to pay the amount which was misappropriated by the merchant who is well known to the petitioner.

                        In the above fact and circumstances the present dispute is not at all maintainable as the present petitioner is failed to establish that the O.P. no.1 has caused any type of deficiency of service and caused any type of financial loss to him, rather the O.P. no.1 has tried her level best to apprise this court that whatever problem occurred was due to the latches of the petitioner and the O.P.no.1 has no role to play so far as the allegations were concerned . On the other hand after receiving the intimation from the petitioner the bank authority has tried level best to resolve the matter and took a decision in favour of the petitioner by reversing one transaction amount to the accout of the petitioner knowing the fact that the petitioner has himself committed the error and only to creat a good banking relationship the O.P no.1 has took the step . Since the petitioner is failed to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt . Hence, the case is liable to be dismissed.

                        On  the date of hearing we have heard arguments from both the sides. Perused the pleadings and documents available on record.

                        It is argued by the advocate from the side of the complainant that on 24.12.13 a sum of Rs.20,500/- had been debited from the S.B account of the complainant which were not returned by the O.Ps. The advocate for the O.Ps. argued that on 24.12.13 eight transactions were made by the complainant through his ATM card and secret code by swipping. The ATM

card and secret pin is within the knowledge of the complainant . Without ATM card and secret pin  no transaction can be made. All the above eight transactions are successful. Hence, the O.Ps. are no way liable to return the said Rs.20,500/- to the complainant as there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. it is the settled principle of law that in view of elaborate procedure involved by bank  it is not possible for money to be withdrawn by an unauthorized person without ATM card and knowledge of PIN number. In the instant case it is not disputed that the ATM card and the PIN number is in the self custody / knowledge of the complainant. In view of elaborate procedure involved  by the O.P’s bank without  ATM card  and knowledge of the PIN number, it is not possible for money to be withdrawn by an unauthorized person . Hence, we hold that the aforesaid withdrawal of rs.20,500/- was done through ATM card and its PIN number  and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. .    

                                                                                    O R D E R

                        In view of the above facts and circumstances we have no option but to dismiss the case  with no order as to costs.       

                        This order is pronounced in the open Forum on this the 2nd day of December ,2014. under my hand and seal of the Forum.

(Shri Pitabas Mohanty)                                                                 (Shri Biraja Prasad Kar)

          Member.                                                                                          President.

                                                                                        Typed to my dictation & corrected by me

(Miss Smita Ray)                                                                                        ( Shri Biraja Prasad Kar )

     Member.                                                                                              President.