| Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CACHAR :: SILCHAR Con. Case No. 32 of 2014 Smti. Kunjashree Das, ……………………………………………………. Complainant. -V/S- 1. Punjab National Bank, Represented by its Branch Manager, Silchar Branch, Hospital Road, Silchar-5. O.P No.1. 2. Central Bank of India, Represented by its Branch Manager, Nehru Place Branch,55 Madhubani, New Delhi-110019. O.P.No.2. Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Mrs. Chandana Purkayastha, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Appeared :- Sri A Biswas, Advocate for the complainant. Sri Debabrata Deb, Advocate for the O.P. No.1. None for O.P.No.2 Date of Evidence……………………….. 01-04-2015 Date of written argument……………… 09-05-2017, 08-06-2017 Date of judgment………………………. 02-08-2017 JUDGMENT AND ORDER Sri Bishnu Dednath, - Smti. Kunjashree Das is holder of Bank Account No. 3110001500000124 of Punjab National Bank, Silchar Branch. On 19-11-2013 she went to ATM of Central Bank situated at Ashram Chowk, at New Delhi to withdraw Rs.1,000/-(One Thousand) only vide ATM ID No. F3ON141001. She attempted trice with her ATM Card No. 5048848881012657485 but machine monitor displayed ‘Transaction Cancelled’. Hence, she left the said ATM and went to ATM machine of Kotak Mahindra and withdraw Rs. 1,000/- and got mini statement. In the mini statement it was shown that she withdrew Rs.10,000/- from ATM Machine of Central Bank.
- Hence, complainant lodged complaint on that very day to Customer Care Centre of the Punjab National Bank but after 10 days i.e. on 29-11-2013 she got letter regarding her complaint to her home address. In that letter the Customer Care replied that complaint has been cancelled because as per their record the transaction was successful. Thereafter lodged written complaint to O.P No.1 the Punjab National Bank on 30-11-2013 and complaint to Maharani Bag Branch of Punjab National Bank on 12-12-2013 but till date nothing has been done. Hence, the present complaint brought to District Consumer Forum for award of Rs.10,000/- and compensation of similar amount for mental shock, agonies, harassment etc. The Punjab National Bank on receiving the notice submitted W/S. In the W/S stated inter-alia that the O.P No.1 did not commit any disservice because as per inquiry and correspondence with Central Bank of India, it was revealed that the complainant’s transaction of Rs.10,000/- was successful. In support of the above plea submitted some documents including journal record. Add cash report of ATM of Central Bank of India dated 20-11-2013, copy of switch report dated 19-11-2013 etc.
- The Central Bank of India, Nehru Place Branch, 55 Madhubani, New Delhi is O.P No.2. But the said O.P No.2 did not submit any W/S. So the case is proceeding exparte against it vide order dated 30-09-2014.
- During hearing the complainant adduced oral evidence and exhibited as many as 13 (Thirteen) documents including journal record, transaction inquiry complaint dated 29-11-2013, 30-11-2013 etc. The O.P No.1 did not submit deposition on oath but prayed before the District Forum to treat the W/S and the documents submitted with W/S are evidence both oral and documentary. Accordingly, my predecessor-in-chair accepted the prayer and opined that W/S filed by the O.P No.1 be treated as evidence, vide order dated 02-03-2015. Of course, both sides’ counsels submitted written argument. We have perused the written argument and evidence on record because none has orally argued their case.
- In this case, the complainant brought the complaint that she did not withdraw Rs.10,000/- on 19-11-2013 from the ATM of Central Bank of India at New Delhi vide ATM ID No. F30N141001 but mini statement of Bank Account vide Ext.3 showed that she withdrew the aforesaid amount from above ATM of Central Bank on 19-11-2013. The O.P No.1 being the Banker of the complainant denied the complaint and took a plea that as per journal record, dated 19-11-2013 and next cash loading record dated 20-11-2013 it was revealed that the complainant withdraw Rs.10,000/- as per transaction No. 678124237775 at 14:40:47 from ATM machine ID No. F30N141001. The O.P No.1 also stated that switch report dated 19-11-2013 of Central Bank of India also shows that Rs.10,000/- has been withdrawn from Account No. 3110001500000124 vide Ext. D and Add cash report vide Ext.C indicated that status was OK.
- We have also gone through the exhibited documents of the complainant. All the documents i.e. journal report, transaction and inquiry report vide Ext.2 and 3 indicated that she had withdrew Rs.10,000/- on 19-11-2013 from ATM vide ID No. F30N141001 on 3rd attempt Thus, it is the burden of the complainant to establish the plea that she withdraw Rs.1,000/- from Kotak Mahindra Bank on the same date and did not withdraw amount of Rs.10,000/- from CBI ATM. She exhibited document vide Ext.3 does reflect that she withdrew that amount on the same date on 19-11-2013 and also that Rs.10,.000/- has been debited from her Bank balance. The fact of the withdraw of Rs.10,000/- is disputed.
- As she deposed that she did not withdraw Rs.10,000/- on 19-11-2013 from ATM of Central Bank and the contesting O.P tried to establish the fact against the interest of the complainant, so, it is the onus of the contesting O.P to establish the fact that withdrew Rs.10,000/-. In this case the O.P submitted the W/S along with relevant documents which marked as Ext. A,B,C,D and as per prayer, the predecessor –in -chair treated the W/S as evidence and above documents as documentary evidence, vide order dated 02-03-2015. The said order of this District Forum has not been challenged by the complainant and no review or revision brought to the competent Forum to set aside the order dated 02-03-2015. Hence, to maintain judicial decorum we have treated the W/S of the O.P as evidence and document submitted with W/S are treated as documentary evidence. Keeping in mind the above factual aspect we are of opinion that as per evidence on record the complainant made 3rd attempt to the ATM of Central Bank of India vide ID No. F30N141001 on 19-11-2013 at 14:40:47 and withdrew Rs.10,000/-. The said transaction in not only reflected in the journal report but also in the switch report vide Ext.D and in the mini statement, vide Ext.3. But surprisingly, the complainant omitted the fact of 3rd attempt to withdraw money from the ATM machine vide ID No. F30N141001 on 19-11-2013. Similarly, in the deposition she omitted to disclose the above fact of 3rd attempt of withdrew Rs.10,000/-. The omission of that vital and material fact is fatal to award relief to the complainant. Therefore, in the instant case non-functioning of C.C T.V footage and re-conciliation chart as per demand of the complainant is ignored. Of course, the O.P submitted Add Cash Report, vide Ext.C which speaks that there is no different amount on physical cash on ATM counter balance on the relevant date.
- Hence, considering all aspect and going through all evidence including documentary evidence, we are of opinion that the complaint of the complainant is not established. As such, no relief is granted and case is dismissed on contest without any cost. Supply free certified copy of this judgment to the parties.
Given under the hand of the President and Members of this District Forum and seal of the Office of the District Forum on this the 2nd day of August, 2017. | |
