SMT. BANDANA ROY, PRESIDENT,
The synopsis of the complaint case is the complainant is a consumer of the Bank of India, Tamluk Branch having his A/C No. 4309101110009177, consumer ID No. 182254130 since 24.08.2017. The complainant also got an ATM card for maintaining his transactions with the Bank A/C. The complainant had been to Orissa on 05.212.2017 and wanted to withdraw money there by using said ATM but after punching the card in the ATM kiosk, the complainant found his balance in the A/C Nil. Over phone the complainant made contact with the OP Bank and stated the situation and bank informed that someone has withdrew an amount of Rs. 45,060 from his A/C on 04.12.2017. Returning home the complainant came to the bank and stated everything and also requested them to take steps. On 26.12.2017 again the complainant had been to the bank when bank handed him a statement exhibiting that someone has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 45,000/- from the account of the complainant time to time. In this regard the complainant further stated that his mobile No. had been provided to the bank for sending massage regarding the transactions, but in this case no massage was given to the complainant by the bank authority. The bank ultimately did nothing to restore the amount of the complainant.
Hence, the instant case with the prayers as made in the complaint petition has been filed by the complainant on the allegation of deficiency of service on the part of the OP Bank.
The OP Bank of India, Tamluk Branch has filed written version and denied all the material allegations made against them and claimed dismissal of the complaint on various grounds of law.
The positive defense of this OP is that the complainant has an account in the bank and also he also maintains ATM card for the transactions. On 11.12.2017 the complainant came to the bank for enquiry of transaction details on written application. Bank supplied the transaction details which disclosed that on 03.122017 Rs. 10,000/- has been withdrawn from ICICI bank, Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 5,000/- ,Rs. 10,000/- and also Rs. 10,000/- has been withdrawn on 04.12.2017 from SICNC 152 (Shop No. 07) Balaji Complex, Delhi. It is the defense of this OP that handling of ATM card and memory of its PIN No. is completely a private and secret act of by the card holder himself and on this ground the OP bank has refused its liability to make good the loss of the complainant as there is no deficiency on the part of the OP for such loss of the complainant.
On such other grounds the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint petition.
On the pleadings of the parties as above, the following issues need be considered (1) whether the case is maintainable and whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.
DECISION WITH REASONS
Both the points are taken up together for discussion for the sake of convenience and brevity.
Perused the complaint, the written version of the OP the affidavit in chief of the complainant and questionnaires filed by the OP and the reply. Heard the argument as advanced by the Ld. Advocate for both sides. Considered.
Admittedly the complainant has a Savings Bank Account in the Bank of India, the OP herein and he has also facility of ATM card issued by the bank for transactions from 28.05.2017. It is alleged by the OP that the does or don’ts of using ATM Card was given to the complainant by the OP and it was advised that the complainant should not disclosed the Pin No. to anyone under any circumstances even if the person claimed that he is a bank employee. When the complainant enquired about the withdrawal of his money from his A/C the ATM cell of the OP had provided detail information of the ATM transactions to them through mail. OP alleged that from the document it appears that on 03.122017 Rs. 10,000/- has been withdrawn from ICICI bank, Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 5,000/- ,Rs. 10,000/- and also Rs. 10,000/- has been withdrawn on 04.12.2017 from SICNC 152 (Shop No. 07) Balaji Complex, Delhi. The OP has alleged that ATM card and its Pin No are confidential and kept by the customer only and there is no role of the Bank in the ATM transactions. If customer passes his ATM card or its Pin No. to any third party, then any fraudulent transaction may take place.
We have also perused the copy of the bank statement filed by the OP which shows that money was withdrawn from shop No. 7 Balaji Complex New Delhi four times from 04.12.2017.
We have perused the affidavit in chief of the complainant wherein the complainant alleged negligence on the part of the Bank and bank is liable for sabotage work done to a customer.
OP filed questionnaires on the basis of the affidavit in-chief filed by the complainant. It was questioned to the complainant “is is true that you received the ATM card and its Pin no by yourself, the answer was – Yes. Is it true that bank official alerted you about how to use this card the answer was –yes. Question no 6. How many times in a month you use your card ? Answer was : use one time after receive of the ATM card. Question no. 8 ; Is your case is nothing but to harass to the OP Bank the complainant answered : It is the duty of the O P bank to inform the customer time to toe for the nature of the transaction by mobile massage but the complainant has not got any mobile massage. It was also questioned - Can you prove your last transaction date of your account ? The answer Yes . But in the case the complainant has given any such detail of his transactions.
In this connection we want to refer a decision dated 07.04.2011 passed by the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, New Delhi where it was observed “it was not at all possible to withdraw money from the Account of the complainant through ATM by any person other than him. Similar principles has been laid down in the aforesaid case and when it is admitted by the complainant that money has been withdrawn through Pay tm, the principle of law will be applicable in this case also. We find that there is neither any deficiency in rendering service on the part of the OP Bank nor did the OP indulged in any unfair trade practice as alleged by the complainant.
The complainant has stated in para 4 of the complaint that he went to Orissa on 05.12.2017 and wanted to withdraw money by punching ATM card there but after punching he noticed that cash in his account was Nil.
The complainant did not file any document to show that he punched the ATM card in any counter in Orissa which showed his balance Nil. There is no cogent evidence of the complainant except his statement in the complaint petition and also in the affidavit in- chief to prove that he punched his ATM card in Orissa and found the balance in the Account - Nil. The complainant also failed to prove that he went to Orissa. In paragraph 6 of the complaint petition the complainant has stated that after returning home on 11.12.17 the complainant went to the Bank to inform the incident and requested them to take steps about the matter, but wherefrom he returned is not clear.
Considering all the above aspects we are of considered view that the complainant case is liable to be dismissed.
Both the points are answered accordingly.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
That CC/32 of 2018 be and the same dismissed on contest against the OP Bank of India.
Parties do bear their own costs.
Let copy of the judgment be supplied to all the parties free of cost.
