O R D E R
SUBHASH GUPTA, MEMBER
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P. u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant on 14.5.2014 at about 8.08 P.M. processed his ATM Card for withdrawal of Rs.6,000/- at ATM of Canara Bank, 15-A, Kamla Nagar, Delhi but the amount was not disburse from the ATM. Thereafter, the complainant went to SBI ATM at 10.17 p.m. to withdraw the same amount, this transaction was successfully done vide slip No.4741. Although the ATM of Canara Bank did not disburse the amount of Rs.6,000/- but an amount of Rs.10,000/- was debited from his account. It has been alleged that Rs.6,000/- should have been debited from his account which was withdrawn from SBI ATM on 14.5.2014. It has been alleged that complainant made number of complaints but no remedial action has been taken so far to correct the entry. It has been further alleged that complainant has lodged the complaint with Call Centre of Canara Bank but to no effect. It has also been alleged that due to said conduct of OP(Canara Bank) the complainant has suffered mentally as well as financially. On these facts complainant prays that OP be directed to rectify the mistake and credit/return amount of Rs.10,000/- alongwith cost and compensation as claimed.
2. Notice of the complaint was issued to the OP. OP appeared and filed its written statement. In the written statement it has been pleaded that the complainant has not come to Forum with clean hands and has presented wrong facts. It has been pleaded that the complainant has withdrawn the money of Rs.10,000/- vide slip no.5839 from the said bank on 14.05.2014 as per records of the ATM transaction. It has been alleged that the complainant merely stated that he had used ATM at 08:08 p.m. and 08:10 p.m at Canara Bank ATM and request was declined under slip no.5840 and 5841 but the statement of copy of passbook clearly shows that on 14.05.2014 at 06:04 p.m. a successful transaction occurred and recorded by the ATM vide transaction No.5839 dated 14.05.2014 for withdrawal of Rs.10,000/-. It has been also pleaded in the written statement that the Bank has rightly debited Rs.10,000/- from the account of the complainant as the said amount was withdrawn by the complainant. It has been further submitted that the complainant after the withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- again attempted to draw some amount from the ATM of Canara Bank two times at 20:08 hours and 20:10 hours on the same day as is evident from the transaction slip no.5840 and 5841 respectively. However the transactions were not successful due to insufficient fund, the complainant again attempted to withdraw a sum of Rs.6000/- from the AMT of State Bank. It has been pleaded by the OP that it is incorrect to claim that the OP Bank has wrongly debited the amount of Rs.6,000/- in the account of complainant. It has also been pleaded that whenever there is a use of ATM machine it issues a slip for successful or unsuccessful transaction and the complainant deliberately has withheld the said transaction slip. O.P on the above premises has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence alongwith documents testifying all the facts made in the complaint. On the other hand Sh. Barkha Ram, Manager of OP has also filed affidavits alongwith documents in evidence on behalf of OP. The O.P has also filed on record switch data report of transaction No.5839 dated 14.05.2014 which shows that vide this transaction a sum of Rs.10,000/- was successfully withdrawn by the complainant.
4. We have carefully gone through the record of the case and have heard submissions of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for the OP. The ATM/ Debit Card remains in the custody of the users. The PIN code is also only known to the users. No transaction can be carried out by the user without ATM/ Debit Card alongwith PIN which is only privy to the users. In the present case also the ATM card was used by the complainant and the PIN number was only in his knowledge without which he could not have operated the ATM. The EJ log/ switch data report recorded by the ATM machine is digitally recorded over which the O.P has no control. In such circumstances we have no hesitation in accepting the contention of the O.P that the said transaction of Rs.10,000/- vide transaction No.5839 dated 14.05.2014 was successful. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency or negligence in service by the O.P. Accordingly, complaint is dismissed.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced on this 19th day of April, 2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (SHAHINA)
President Member Member
