IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No.CC /62/2017.
Date of Filing: 20.04.2017. Date of Final Order: 17.05.2018.
Complainant: Hemanta Kumar Das, C/O Late Nani Gopal Das,
Vill. Sekendra (Tanti para), P.O. Giria, P.s. Raghunathganj,
Dist. Murshidabad. Pin 742230.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: 1. Branch Manager, U.B.I, Jangipur Branch, P.O. Jangipur,
P.S. Raghunathganj, Dist. Murshidabad.
2. Branch Manager, Axix Bank, P.O.& P.S Rathunathganj,
Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742225.
Agent/Advocate for the Complainant : None.
Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party : Sri Subhas Saha.
Present: Sri Asish Kumar Senapati…………………. President.
Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty ……………………..Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri Asish Kumar Senapati, President.
This is a complaint U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986.
One Hemanta Kumar Das ( herein after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against the Branch Manager, UBI, Jangipur Branch and the Branch Manager of Axix Bank , Raghunathganj (herein after referred to as the OPs) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.
The sum and substance of the complaint is as follows:-
The complainant is a handicapped teacher who has SB account with the OP No.1 Branch and he has ATM card. On 24.02.2017 the complainant went to ATM of Axix Bank, Raghunathganj with a view to draw Rs.1500/- but of no result and at the time of getting mini statement he took help of an unknown person. After that he went to the ATM of SBI, Darbesh Para and returned home after drawing Rs.1, 000/- from the said ATM. On 25.02.2017 he tried to withdraw some amount from different ATMs of the UBI, SBI at Jangipur but of no result. On 26.02.2017 he also tried to draw some amount from the ATM of SBI but of no result and ultimately he got from his balance enquiry that he had only Rs. 55,566/- in his account in lieu of 1,50,000/-. On that day he went to UBI, Jangipur Branch for up-dating his Pass-Book but could not be successful on that day and on 27.02.2017 he found that his balance is only Rs.4,462/- and on enquiry a staff of the Bank showed him from his computer that someone withdrew Rs.2500/- from Jamshedpur Transport during their conversation. Then, the complainant locked his ATM. Hence, the Complainant lodged the complaint praying for crediting all the amounts withdrawn by unknown persons/person from 24.02.16 to 27.0217 from his account.
The OP No.1 put his appearance and filed written version on 11.09.2017 contending that the complaint is not maintainable as the matter is totally falls under Cyber Offence. It is the case of the OP No.1 that all the transactions were held at different ATMs. The OP No.1 is not liable for the alleged transactions. The complainant lodged FIR with the Ragunathganj P.S and Raghunathganj P.S. Case No. 313/17 dt. 7.04.17 was started U/Ss 379/ 420 IPC and the OP No.1 has supplied all the relevant photocopies and bank statements to the police.
The OP No.1 prays for dismissal of the complaint.
The OP No.2 filed written version on 27.11.17 contending that the complainant is not a consumer of the OP No.2. The written version of OP No.2 states that the complainant admitted in his complaint that he took help of one unknown person at an ATM counter. It is also mentioned in the written version of the OP No.2 that the complainant disclosed confidential PIN to the unknown person for the purpose of withdrawing some amount and it is purely fault on the part of the complainant. There is no deficiency in service or negligence on the part of the OP No.2.
Upon pleadings of parties, the following points are framed for proper adjudication of the case.
Points for Decision.
- Is the complainant a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
- Have the OPs any deficiency in service, as alleged?
- Is the complainant entitled to get relief/reliefs, as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons.
Point Nos. 1&2.
Both the points are taken up together for the sake of brevity and convenience.
The complainant submits that he is a consumer under the OPs as he is a customer of the OP No.1 and he has hired the services of the OP No.1 on payment of charges. It is urged that this Forum has both territorial and pecuniary jurisdictions to entertain the case.
It is contended that the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and the claimed amount is within the pecuniary limit of the District Forum.
We have gone through the complaint, written version and evidence of both sides and Xerox copies of documents filed by the complainant.
On perusal of the documents, we find that the complainant is a consumer as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and this Forum has both territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the case.
Both the points are decided in favour of the complainant.
Point Nos. 3&4.
The complainant has submitted that huge amount had been withdrawn from his account during the period from 24.02.2017 to 27.02.2017 without his knowledge. It is argued that the statement regarding withdrawal of amount has been received from the OP No.1 which shows that huge amount had been withdrawn from different ATM counters situated at different places within the states of West Bengal and Jharkhand. It is urged that the ATM card is still with him and he locked the ATM card on 27.02.17, when he got the information that some unknown persons/person withdrew the amount from his savings account by using the ATM card.
He prays for an order so that the amount withdrawn by some unknown persons/person may be credited in his account.
Ld. Advocate for the OP no.1 submits that the OP No.1 has no deficiency in service and it is apparent from the statement of the complainant that he took help of an unknown person on 24.02.17 and probably he disclosed the credentials of his ATM card to that unknown person. It is argued that the OP no.1 Bank has no liability for withdrawal of any amount by using the ATM card of the complainant and prays for dismissal of the complaint against the OP No.1.
Ld. Advocate for the OP No.2 submits that the complainant is not a consumer of the OP no.2 and he claims that he used the ATM card at the ATM of this OP No.2 on 24.02.17 to withdraw some amount from the account of the complainant.
It is argued that the OP no.2 has nothing to do in this regard and the OP No.2 has no deficiency in service.
Perused the complaint petition, written version and the Xerox copies of the documents submitted by the complainant.
It appears from the Annexure 1 that a huge amount of money had been withdrawn from the period from 24.02.17 to 27.02.17 through P.Os and ATM of different banks at different places including Murshidabad, Benachati-Durgapur, Durgapur, Asansol, Jamshedpur and Ranchi from the savings account of the Complainant.
It is the version of the complainant that the Bank employee informed him on 27.02.17 that during the time of taking balance of the account of the complainant at about 10.08 a.m that someone withdrew Rs.2500/- from Jamsheedpur Transport and on getting that information, the complainant locked the operation of his ATM card. The complainant has not even alleged that the OPs are directly or indirectly involved in debiting the amount from the account of the complainant. We find that the complainant lodged complaint with the Branch Manager of OP No.1 for the first time on 03.03.17 (Annexure 2) for taking appropriate action.
It is clear from the submission of the Ld. Advocates of the OPs that Raghunathganj P.S. case No. 313/17 dt. 7.04.17 has been started U/Ss 379/420 IPC and the OP No.1 has supplied all the relevant documents to the Police Authority. We find that a huge amount about Rs.1,47,000/- had been withdrawn from the account of the complainant during the period from 24.02.17 to 27.02.17(Annexure 1) and the allegation of the complainant is that the complainant had not withdrawn the said amount of Rs.1,47,000/- . On a careful consideration , we find that a huge amount had been withdrawn from the account of the Complainant during the period from 24.02.17 to 27.02.17 through his ATM Card from different ATMs and POs at different places but we find no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. We find that the complainant has failed to establish any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.
Hence, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.
Point Nos. 3&4 are thus disposed of against the complainant.
Reasons for Delay:
The complaint was filed on 20.4.17 and the case was admitted on 27.04.17.
This Forum tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the Sec. 13(3A) of the C.P. Act,1986. The delay in disposal of the case has been explained in day to day orders.
Hence, it is
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 62/2017 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest against the OPs without any order as to cost.
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
Dictated & corrected by me.
President.
Member President.
