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

CASE No.  CC/22/2019.

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

19.02.19                               27.02.19                                   14.03.24

Complainant: Md. Abdul Jabbar Ali

S/O Ainuddin Sk, Vill-Diarjalibagicha,

PO&PS-Bhagwangola, Pin-742135

-Vs-

Opposite Party:  Branch Manager,

United Bank Of India,

Bhagwangola Branch,

PO&PS-Bhagwangola, Pin-742135

Agent/Advocate for the Complainant                        : Akhtar Masud.

Agent/Advocate for the Opposite Party                     : Subhash Saha.

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

         Sri. Nityananda Roy……………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

Sri.ajay kumar das, presiding member.

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

            One Md.  Abdul Jabbar Ali (here in after referred to as the Complainant) filed the case against Branch Manager, United Bank of India, Bhagwangola 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 is a bonafide consumer of the OP Bank being A/c No. 0232010365208. On 10.08.18 the Complainant tried to withdraw  Rs. 20,000/- from a UBI ATM Counter but transaction was failed being transaction No. CWDR/000000696610/0908/520531 thereafter the Complainant tried for the second time to withdraw of Rs.10,000/- from the said ATM counter and the said transaction was succeed and the Complainant received only Rs. 10,000/- being transaction No. CWDR/000000005163/1008180703. But the OP Bank deducted Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- from the A/c of the Complainant. It is pertinent to note that the withdrawal limit of the ATM Card of the Complainant was of Rs. 20,000/- per day.

                 Thereafter, the Complainant several time requested the OP to return the amount of Rs. 20,000/- in the account of the Complainant but the OP bank did not pay any heed.

                 On 28.09.18, the Complainant sought information for rejection proof of the said failure transaction but the OP Bank denied the same. Thereafter the Complainant informed the Local P.S. stating all the facts but nothing has been done.

                 The act of OP is illegal, unjustified and against the principle of banking law. Finding no other alternatives the Complainant filed this complaint before this commission for appropriate relief with a direction to credit of Rs. 20,000/- into the account of the Complainant and to pay Rs. 50,000/- for compensation of harassment and mental agony.

                 The OP is contesting the case by filing  written version contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable and it is barred by Consumer Protection Act.

                 The OP Bank denied the entire allegation made by the Complainant to the OP. The OP has specifically stated that the Complainant had not withdrawn Rs. 20,000/- on 10.08.18. The OP has lodged complaint through ATMCMPL on 13.08.18 but after few days the complaint was rejected by CBS through ATMCMPL. After that this OP has mailed to IT officers of Regional office at Berhampore, they had taken the matter to HO and provided the rejection proof. The OP has provided the rejection proof to the Complainant and after that he visited the RO to meet IT Officers. They told the same thing to the Complainant as per report received. In spite of knowing all the fact the Complainant has filed the instant petition for ulterior motive.

     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 the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

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

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1

Ld. Adv. for the Complainant submits that the Complainant is a consumer to the OP. On this point Ld. Adv. for the OP stated nothing. Moreover, we peruse the materials on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions advanced by the parties we are of the view that the Complainant is a consumer to the OP. The Point No. 1 is thus decided in favour of the Complainant.

Point No.2&3

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

                 Ld. Advocate for the Complainant submits before this Commission that on 10.08.18 the Complainant tried to withdraw Rs. 20,000/- from a UBI ATM Counter but transaction was failed being transaction No. CWDR/000000696610/0908/520531 thereafter the Complainant tried for the second time to withdraw of Rs.10,000/- from the said ATM counter and the said transaction was succeed and the Complainant received only Rs. 10,000/- being transaction No. CWDR/000000005163/1008180703. But the OP Bank deducted Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- from the A/c of the Complainant. It is pertinent to note that the withdrawal limit of the ATM Card of the Complainant was of Rs. 20,000/- per day.

                 Thereafter, the Complainant several time requested the OP to return the amount of Rs. 20,000/- in the account of the Complainant but the OP bank did not pay any heed.

                 On 28.09.18, the Complainant sought information for rejection proof of the said failure transaction but the OP Bank denied to supply the same. Thereafter the Complainant informed the Local P.S. stating all the facts but nothing has been done.

                 The act of OP is illegal, unjustified and against the principle of banking law. Finding no other alternatives the Complainant filed this complaint before this commission for appropriate relief with a direction to credit of Rs. 20,000/- into the account of the Complainant and to pay Rs. 50,000/- for compensation of harassment and mental agony.

                 Ld. Advocate for the OP submits before this Commission that the Complainant withdrew Rs. 20,000/- on 09.08.18 at 20.53 hours and that transaction was reflected in their ledger account that on 10.08.18. He files supporting documents in support of his argument.

                 Ld. Advocate for the OP further submits that the Complainant made an allegation over this matter to the Branch Manager, BOI Bhagwangola Branch. The Complainant was inquired into by the competent authority and the allegation of the Complainant was rejected on the basis of the materials on record available in the hands of the bank authorities. He also files a document to that effect before this Commission.

                 Keeping in mind the submissions advanced by the parties we peruse the materials on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials on record we are of the view that the Complainant has failed to establish his case and as such the instant complaint case is liable to be dismissed.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 19.02.19 and admitted on 27.02.19. 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/22/2019 be and the same is  dismissed on contest  against the OP.

        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.