IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST SINGHBHUM AT CHAIBASA

                                                                  Present: -  1. Sri Vijai Kumar Sharma, President,

                                                                2. Sri Rajiv Kumar, Member,

                                                                3. Smt. Deoshree Choudhary, Member.

                                                                           C. C. Case No. 24/2014

Chaibasa, Dated 03.08.2022

                                           Dinesh Kumar Thakur, Pulhatu Bara Bazar, P.O. Chaibasa, West Singhbhum,             

                                                    (Jharkhand)…........................................................Complainant

Vs.

The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda Chaibasa Branch..…...Opposite Party No.1

                                             The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Nursarai, District Nalanda,

                                              (Bihar)…………......................................................Opposite Party No.2

                                                  Advocate for Complainant………........Sri A. K. Sao, Advocate.

                                                       Advocate for Opposite Party No.1 Sri…… A.N Roy, Advocate.

                                                Advocate for Opposite Party No.2……..…U. S. Vidyarthi, Advocate. (Since dead)

JUDGMENT

     This case has been filed by the complainant Dinesh Kumar Thakur against O.P. Punjab National Bank and Bank of Baroda through their Branch Manager for an award of Rs.30, 000.00 only including compensation towards mental and physical harassment showing deficiency of service by the O.P.

     Briefly stated case of the complainant Dinesh Kumar Thakur, Pulhatu Bara Bazar, P.O. Chaibasa, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand that on 05.08.2014 he visited A.T.M. of Punjab National Bank, Nursarai, District Nalanda, State of Bihar for withdrawing Rs.5000.00 through A.T.M.  in this regard but he did not receive any money from A.T.M. rather Rs.20000.00 was deducted from his Savings Bank Account further that his Savings Bank Account number which has been opened in the Bank of Baroda Chaibasa Branch bearing Savings Bank Account No.12390100004810 and his A.T.M. Card was also issued by  the Bank of Baroda Chaibasa Branch.  Further that when he reached Chaibasa on 09.08.2014 and checked the account then found that on 05.08.2014 Rs.25000.00 has been deducted which is beyond the limit prescribed in  his A.T.M. Card then he made contact  with Customer Care Bank of Baroda and also filed complaint in the local branch Bank of Baroda but he  has been informed that within 7 days his grievance will be redressed by compensating you but Bank did not take any action nor any amount has been adjusted which has been deducted from his Savings Bank Account.  Then on 26.08.2014 he made written complaint in the Bank of Baroda Chaibasa Branch but his complaint was not received by the Bank rather the same was refused and in this way he suffered mental, economic and physical loss and finally instant case has been filed by the complainant for an award of Rs.30000.00 including physical and mental compensation.

     After admission notice was issued to the O.Ps who have appeared and written statements has been filed with intention to contest the case.  As per written statements filed on behalf of O.Ps. legal and factual grounds have  been taken by the O.P. that case of the complainant is bad in the eye of  law and barred by law of limitation same is not maintainable under the provision of Consumer Protection Act.  Further that suffers from the defect of mis-joinder of the party.  Further complainant has not in the jurisdiction of this court and is not to try the case rather case should be dismissed in wants of proper jurisdiction.  Further that complainant has never approached Bank authority of the party with grievance and after receiving of notice from the court O.P.  has investigated the matter and found that Rs.20000.00 has successfully delivered by the Bank to the complainant vide Transaction No.6083 and 6084 dated 05.08.2014 and accordingly no excess money was found in reconciliation charge and video footage also shows that alleged amount has been successfully disbursed on 05.08.2014 at given time and investigation report has been prepared by the computer which is admissible under law and does not create any suspicion.  Further that complainant after receiving the amount has filed false case against the O.P. and he is not liable to get any relief from the O.P.

     Similarly written statement has been filed on behalf of O.P. Bank of Baroda through its Branch Manager and similar legal ground has been taken by these O.Ps. further case of the O.P. Bank of Baroda is  that if any money is withdrawn by the customer and A.T.M. does not function properly and card holder did not receive the amount then such activity of service of A.T.M. is noted in the system of A.T.M. itself.  Further that after receiving complaint of the complainant answering O.P. has taken all necessary step through N.F.S. System regarding the grievance of the complainant and also by contacting Nursarai Branch of Punjab National Bank from whose A.T.M. problem is arisen and after conciliation this fact has revealed that complainant has withdrawn an amount of Rs.10000.00 on 05.08.2014 at 11.18 hours and in the same day complainant has also withdrawn of Rs.10000.00 at 11.23 hours and this fact has been revealed from the journal of the acquiring Bank and this fact has been communicated by the Punjab National Bank Nursarai Branch to the answering O.P. without any delay.  Further that it appears that the A.T.M. Card of complainant was issued at the relevant time by another person due to which the card holder was not available in the captioned video clip therefore O.P. is not liable for any relief to the complainant and therefore prayer has been made by the O.P. to dismiss the case with cost.

    In support of the complaint case complainant has filed his affidavited evidence as well as photocopy of petition dated 26.08.2014 given to the Branch Manager Bank of Baroda Chaibasa with request to pay Rs.20000.00 in his Savings Bank Account as above amount has been wrongly shown deducted from his Savings Bank Account as he has not received above money from the A.T.M.  On the other hand in support of the written statements both Branch Manager of O.Ps. have furnished their affidavited evidence along with photocopy of the documents in addition to that Disc of the video clip with report has also been filed on behalf of the O.P. and during argument report of the Punjab National Bank dated 06.02.2015 regarding video clip as well as related with the complaint case has been filed which has been marked as Exhibit I by Court while other documents of O.P has been marked as A, B & Video CD as Exhibit C.  After hearing argument of both sides case has been fixed for judgment.

     Evidence adduced by both sides will be basis for finding of this case.

FINDING

     On perusal of documentary evidence of complainant it appears that complainant in his affidavited evidence has supported his complaint petition showing operating his A.T.M. Card in the Punjab National Bank at Nursarai, District Biharsarif (Bihar).  Further that he firstly wanted to withdrawal Rs.5000.00 through his A.T.M. Card two times but did not get required money and later on he came to know that his total amount Rs.25000.00 has been debited from his Savings Bank Account which was not given to complainant then he immediately rushed to the A.T.M. Machine where he operated A.T.M. Card but he found that guard was not available then he made contact with customer care and filed complaint regarding the occurrence with customer care and his online complaint was registered as bearing No.2014080512784754 and 2014080512784771 and he was informed  through customer care number that Rs.5000.00 which was shown wrongly as withdrawal has been given back to his account but so far as Rs.20000.00 is concerned customer care advised to make contact with Bank where Savings Bank Account is opened then after three days when he came back to Chaibasa then filed a written complaint stating the occurrence and information given by the customer care then after enquiry Bank refused to pay the amount or re-credit his amount to his Savings Bank and still his Savings Bank Account shows Rs.20000.00 debited from his account and when his grievance was not redressed then he has filed instant case before this Forum.

     Complainant has filed photocopy of written complaint which was given to the Bank of Baroda Chaibasa Branch on 26.08.2014 and the same of has been marked as Exhibit 1

     On the other hand in support of show-cause O.P. has filed several documents including letter dated 15.09.2014 mentioning therein that Track No.6083 and 6084 are successful and no excess case found in reconciliation and further that we are following of for C. C. TV footage with our vendor further A.T.M. ID print report has also been filed which has been marked as  Exhibit B and i,e. statement of loading the money in A.T.M. Machine which in question on 02.08.2014 and 08.08.2014 for the relevant period.  Further it is worthy to mention that Disc of Video CD was produced in the court on behalf of O.P. along with report on 27.11.2014 and same was displayed in the court and thereafter expert opinion was required and on 06.02.2015 report regarding video clip has been sent by one Nirja Bodra Chief Manager and that report has been marked exhibit in this case by the Court as I as report was sent in Forum in the form of letter.

     Ongoing through written statement of O.P. it shows that averment has been made that complainant cum customer A.T.M. holder has withdrawn Rs.20000.00 in two transactions through A.T.M. Card as journal of the acquiring Bank shows and this fact has been reported  by the both O.Ps. and one plea has also been taken  further that CD, Switch, Transaction Report dated 05.08.2014 figure of the complainant has not operating in video clip but on 05.08.2014 transactions made by the complainant are success and no excess cash was found reconciliation.  Further plea has been taken that amount has been duly operated by the card holder on 05.08.2014 on two occurrence he availed by himself or through his agent.

     Further plea has been taken in written argument on behalf of the O.P. that transaction has been done either complainant himself or through his agent but transaction is successful and this fact is stated by the O.P. in their affidavited evidence.  But when exhibit I is perused which is report regarding video clip with respect to relevant period shows that complainant was present in A.T.M. room and the same report has been sent none other than Chief Manager O.P. No.2 and that report goes to show that averment made in the written statement or in the affidavited evidence by O.Ps does not tally with the report which has been marked in this case as exhibit I.  On perusal of the report of exhibit I it is clear that Chief Manager has stated that after going  through the video clip related to above mentioned  case   his observation are as under: -

     “that video footage shows that above named customer was present in the A.T.M. Room and tried for A.T.M. transaction but failed to withdraw the cash further that second observation is that video footage shows that the A.T.M. had dispensed the cash successfully to some of the customer between the period 11.08,11.55hours,11.56 hours and 11.57 hours”

     These observations of the Chief Manager Neeraj Bodra clearly shows that complainant cum customer was present in A.T.M. Room and he could not withdraw the cash through A.T.M. transaction and these observation does not corroborate pleading and evidence of the O.Ps. and further their observation report of Chif manager Neeraj Bodra cannot be disbelieve and also the same has been submitted in compliance of  court orderin connection with instant case by a very responsible person who is holding post of Chief Manager.  Rather report of Chief Manager support the complainant’s case that during A.T.M. operation on 05.08.2014 he made personal transition with A.T.M but could not receive Rs.20000.00 rather the same has been shown as debited from his Savings Bank Account and presence of the customer / complainant is also proved by the report submitted by the Chief Manager of Punjab National Bank and as per our considered opinion this report is trust worthy and goes in favour of the complainant.

     So finally we come to the conclusion that complainant has proved his case through his affidavited evidence and case also stands proved from the report of Chief Manager that is exhibit I and complainant is  entitled for relief in this case .  At the same time we are view that there is deficiency of service on behalf of the O.Ps. So case is worthy for decree.

     Accordingly it is therefore.

ORDER

     That case of the complainant is decreed on contest against O.Ps and O.Ps. are directed  to pay Rs.20000.00 @ 9% per annum to the complainant from the date of filing of the case till realization.  Further O.Ps. are directed to pay Rs.5000.00 as litigation cost and Rs.10000.00 as compensation towards mental and physical harassment caused to  the complainant.  Above awarded amount will be paid by the O.Ps. to the complainant within 30 days of judgment communicated to them.  Let copy of this judgment be furnished both parties free of cost for their information and compliance.

Sri Rajiv Kumar                Smt. Deoshree Choudhary        Sri Vijai Kumar Sharma

     Member                                      Member                                    President