IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC/60/2017
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
20.04.17 27.04.17 22.07.22
Complainant: Tabijul Islam, Prop. M/s Imran and Akram Cloth,
S/o – Iskandar Sk,
Vill & PO– Nowpukuria
P.S.- Beldanga,
Dist-Murshidabad
PIN-742133
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Branch Manager, Union Bank of India,
Beldanga Branch, Opposite Bharat Sevashram Sangha,
Chhapakhana More, Amtola Road.
P.O. & P.S. Beldanga, Dist- Murshidabad,
Pin-742133
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : Peasanta Kumar Singha.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Parties : Subhash Saha
.
Present: Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.
Sri. Subir Sinha Roy………………………………….Member.
Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
SMT ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY, MEMBER.
This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.
One Tabijul Islam (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Branch Manager, Union Bank of India (here in after referred to as the OP) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-
The complainant is a consumer of the O.P. Bank vide his Saving Bank Account No. 742601012225 along with ATM facilities. O.P. provides ATM Card bearing No. 6069927426000997 on 24.11.17 at about 15.14 hr. The complainant in order to withdraw Rs. 10,000/- from the ATM of SBI near Khandwa Bus Station at Madhya Pradesh inserted ATM Card but the complainant did not get any money and the Information Slip bearing transaction no. 8005 showed “sorry unable to process” and on the same day at about 18.25 hr the complainant received a SMS containing that Rs. 10,000/- has been debited from the account of the complainant. The complainant made a phone call to the toll free number and the customer care of the Bank and narrated the incidents and later on informed the Branch Manager of Beldanga Branch where the complainant has its account. But till date complainant has not received any relief. Finding no other alternative the complainant filed this instant case against the O.P. for appropriate relief.
Defence Case
After due service of the notice O.P. appeared by filing W/V containing inter alia that the case is not maintainable as after demonetization the Central Government as well as RBI imposed some restrictions on the cash deposit or withdrawal from ATM and its limitation has been fixed to Rs. 10,000/- per day per card and at 23.01.2017 the petitioner withdraw Rs. 10,000/- by using his ATM Card and collected the same amount and on the same date he used the ATM Card for withdrawal of another Rs. 10,000/- which exceeds the limit and one proxy transaction started to operate wherein Rs. 10,000/- was debited from the bank’s suspended account vide No. 74260825009100 and he got Rs. 10,000/- (transaction no. CAA954477). By the same time it needs Rs. 10,000/- for adjustment of suspense account and that was debited from the account of the complainant vide transaction no. AA574955 dated 24.01.2017 and by this way suspended account was adjusted on 24.01.2017. As the complainant never used the ATM Card on 24.01.2017 for the collection of the money as alleged and the process of credit and debit is system generated, so there is no deficiency of service on the part of the O.P. so the case is liable to be dismissed.
On the basis of the complaint and written version the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case:
Points for decision
1. Is the Complainant a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?
2. Is the Complainant entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:
Point no.1 & 2
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.
Undoubtedly the complainant is a consumer having account with the O.P. Bank. So the complainant is termed as consumer.
In order to prove the case the complainant has filed some documents but they are illegible. On 03.04.2019 vide Order No. 21 this Commission ordered the complainant to file legible copy of documents but till date the complainant has not filed legible copy neither produced any original documents to prove his case and on 18.02.2020, on 18.03.2020, on 20.04.2020, on 07.08.2020, on18.09.2020, on 27.11.2020, on 22.03.2022, on 03.05.2021, on 11.02.2022, on 29.03.2022, on 28.06.2022, on 05.07.2022 the complainant has not appeared before this commission for argument and production of the legible copy of the documents. So due to want of the legible documents this commission declined to pass any order and as such the case is dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that the complainant is not interested to continue the case. The case is liable to be dismissed but without cost.
Reasons for delay
The Case was filed on 20.04.17 and admitted on 27.04.17. 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 is dismissed.
Fees paid are correct.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the complaint Case No. CC/60/2017 be and the same is dismissed but 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
