IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                CASE No.  CC/89/2019.

 Date of Filing:                    Date of Admission:            Date of Disposal:

   19.07.19                                    05.08.19                                    20.06.22

Complainant: Md. Selim Sk

S/O Md. Ibrahim Sk, VIll&PO-Takipur,

                        PS-Rejinagar, Pin-742189

-Vs-

Opposite Party:  Branch Manager, State Bank Of India,

Rejinagar Branch

Vill&PO&PS- Rejinagar, Pin-742189

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                        : Partha Majumder.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party                     : Satinath Chandra.

   Present:   Sri Ajay Kumar Das………………………….......President.     

                    Sri. Subir Sinha Roy……………………………….Member.                        

                     Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

FINAL ORDER

   Sri. Ajay Kumar Das, Presiding Member.

       This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

            One Md. Selim Sk. (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Rejinagar Branch (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

      The material facts giving rise to file the complaint are that:-

            The Complainant opened one S/B account in the OP Bank being S/B account No.32193299680 mode of operation of the said account is individual.

            The Complainant used to said account regularly and his telephone no was registered in the said account. On 06.05.19 the Complainant received four SMS from the OP Bank at about 9.20 AM regarding the withdrawal of Rs.80,000/- from his account. Each and every message inform the Complainant debited sum of Rs.20,000/- each. Out of that Rs.20,000/- and Rs.20,000/- withdraw from ATM cash being transaction No.7360 and 7361 at SBI Dumka and Rs. 20,000/- and 20,000/- transfer to Mr. Balasaheb Shankar being account No.559601002293616. The Complainant never withdraw and transfer of those amount.

            After knowing such transfer and withdrawal Complainant lodge a written complain before the Rejinagar P.S. on 06.05.19 being G.D. No.207/19 and on 07.05.19 Complainant lodge a written complaint to OP regarding such illegal transfer. That complaint was register being No.5477076071. On 17.05.19 OP sent SMS to the Complainant that complaint being No.5477076071 was closed after resolution. The Complainant thereafter went to the OP branch regarding the result of the said complaint but the OP did not inform the Complainant and not handed over any written resolution or result of the enquiry. This short of conduct on the part of the OP is gross violation of deficiency of service.

            Due to deficiency of service of the OP, the Complainant has been suffering heavy economic loss and damages and the OP acted illegally and cost much harassment and mental agony to this Complainant.

            Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed the case before this Commission.

            OP filed Written Version on 13.09.19 stating inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable, it has no cause of action to file this case, the complaint is barred by the Law of limitation, The case is barred by jurisdiction and the case is bad for defect of parties.

            OP stated that the Complainant stated in the complaint that on 06.05.19 he got four SMS regarding four transactions of Rs.20,000/- each, whereby he had no knowledge of after informing the fact to the OP on 07.05.19 or the OP closed the complaint on 17.05.19 or the OP did not hand over any written resolution to the Complainant or there is any negligence from the part of the Complainant or due deficiency in service the Complainant has suffered for any economic loss and damages are not true.

            OP further stated that as and when the OP was informed about the complaint of the Complainant, OP lodged complaint in Complaint Management System to sort out the complain. On 21.05.19 the Complaint Management System preliminary detected that the disputed transactions were made without intervention of the Complainant, so they closed the complaint and made distinct investigation over the allegation of the Complainant. On 06.08.19 the competent authority by sending letter to the OP instructed to restore the disputed ATM transactions amount of Rs.80,000/- to the complaint. Accordingly, the OP credited a sum of Rs.80,000/- into the Account of the Complainant on 07.08.19. So, there is no negligence or deficiency of service on the part of the OP and the complaint is liable to be rejected against the OP.

                    On the basis of the complaint and the written versions the following points are framed for proper  adjudication of the case :

Points for decision

1. Isthe Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?

3.Whether the Complaints Case is bad for defect of parties?

4. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

5. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1

            It appears from the materials on record that the Complainant is a consumer as he hired services of the OP for consideration.

On going through the complaint, written version and other materials on record, we find that the Complainant is a consumer in terms of section 2 (I )(d) (ii) of the C.P.Act, 1986 as he hired services of the OP for consideration.

Point No.2,3,4 & 5

        All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

            The point to be noted is that 09.06.22 was fixed for hearing of argument but neither of the parties appeared and as such we have decided to dispose of the instant complaint case on merit, particularly when we find that no steps are being taken on 28.07.20, 23.09.20,01.12.20,28.01.21,05.04.21,16.06.21 and 23.12.21. It is alleged by the Complainant that on 06.05.19, the Complainant received four SMS from the OP Bank at about 9.20 AM regarding the withdrawal of Rs.80,000/- from his account. Each and every message informed the Complainant about the  debited sum of Rs.20,000/- each. Out of that Rs.20,000/- and Rs.20,000/- withdrawn from ATM cash being transaction No.7360 and 7361 at SBI Dumka and Rs. 20,000/- and 20,000/- were transferred to Mr. Balasaheb Shankar being account No.559601002293616. The Complainant has never withdrawn and transferred of those amounts.

            After knowing such transfer and withdraw Complainant lodge a written complain before the Rejinagar P.S. on 06.05.19 being G.D. No.207/19 and on 07.05.19 Complainant lodge a written complaint to OP regarding such illegal transfer. That complaint was registered being No.5477076071. On 17.05.19 OP sent SMS to the Complainant that complaint being No.5477076071 was closed after resolution. The Complainant thereafter went to the OP branch regarding the result of the said complaint but the OP did not inform the Complainant and not handed over any written resolution or result of the enquiry. This short of conduct on the part of the OP is gross violation of deficiency of service.

            The Complainant files evidence on affidavit corroborating the fact mentioned in the complaint.

            OP Bank entered appearance in this case and filed written version to the effect that on 21.05.19 the OP lodged complaint in the Complaint Management System to sort out the complain. On 21.05.19 the Complaint Management System preliminary detected that the disputed transactions were made without intervention of the Complainant, so they closed the complaint and made distinct investigation over the allegation of the Complainant. On 06.08.19 the competent authority by sending letter to the OP instructed to restore the disputed ATM transactions amount of Rs.80,000/- to the complaint. Accordingly, the OP credited a sum of Rs.80,000/- into the Account of the Complainant on 07.08.19.

            The OP Bank filed a petition on 15.01.20 with the prayer for treating their written version as evidence particularly when the written version has been filed on affidavit. From the written version, we find that the OP credited a sum of Rs.80,000/- into the A/C of the Complainant on 07.08.19. The OP has not taken up for long period. Such being the position, we believe the written version of the OP Bank and consequently the instant complaint case is liable to be dismissed.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 19.07.19 and admitted on 05.08.19. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act,1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case fails.

            Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is

                                                            Ordered

       that the complaint Case No. CC/89/2019 be and the same is dismissed on contest  against the OP without costs.

             Let plain copy of this order  be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand  /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

      Confonet.nic.in