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 facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant is the bank account holder bearing No.2418101006434 with the bank of OP and also having debit card facility of his account. On 02.11.2013 the complainant tried to withdraw Rs.15,000/- from the ATM of Canara Bank at Kalkaji, New Delhi but the transaction failed. It is alleged that after failing of first transaction, the complainant tried to withdraw Rs.10,000/- again but this transaction also failed. It is alleged that the complainant never received the above amount but both the transactions were debited in his account. It is alleged that the matter was taken up with the OP and after verification, the OP credited the amount of Rs.10,000/- in the complainant’s account but the amount of Rs.15,000/- was not credited till date. It is alleged that on 5.11.2013 the complainant had written a letter and highlighted his grievance. It is alleged that Nodal Officer of OP’s Bank gave certain photographs of the transaction done by the complainant but the same were not the right photographs as he is not seen in any of the images which itself vindicates his point. It is alleged that on 7.3.2014 complainant had approached the Banking Ombudsman but they disposed of his grievance without giving any opportunity to the complainant. It is alleged that the complainant made many complaints verbally but all in vain. On these facts complainant prays that OP be directed to pay/return amount of Rs.15,000/- alongwith cost and compensation as claimed.
2. OP appeared and filed their written statement. In its written statement OP has not disputed that complainant is a bank account holder bearing No.2418101006434 and also having debit card facility. It is alleged that on 2.11.2013 the complainant had made ATM transaction amounting to Rs.15,000/- at Kalkaji, New Delhi and the amount was debited from the Canara Bank. It is alleged that as per Switch Centre Report and EJ log report the above said transaction was successful and the ATM Cell checked with CRA, they have not found any excess cash; therefore the OP is not liable for this claim. It is specifically denied that the ATM machine’s message was “Unable to process your transaction”. It is also alleged that the complainant has not received any receipt from ATM machine with message ”Unable to process your transaction”. It is alleged that the photographs reg. transaction done by the complainant are right photographs. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Dismissal of the complaint has been prayed for.
3. Complainant has filed his affidavit in evidence testifying all the facts made in the complaint. On the other hand Sh. Madhukar Branch Manager has also filed affidavit alongwith documents in evidence on behalf of OP.
4. We have carefully gone through the record of the case and have heard submissions of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for the OP. We have also perused the copy of EJ Log which clearly show that on 2.11.2013 at 17.59 vide withdrawal transaction No.5690 was transacted successfully and an amount of Rs.15000/- was withdrawn. The same is Ex.RW-1/4which prove that the transaction was successfull. As this is an electronically generated record the same cannot be disbelieved. The complainant has not placed on record the copy of the receipt which showed that the ATM was unable to carry out the transaction.
5. In view of this it cannot be said that there was any deficiency in service by the OP. Hence, the complaint is dismissed. Order accordingly.
Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.
Announced this 23rd day of February,2016.
(K.S. MOHI) (SUBHASH GUPTA) (MRS. SHAHINA)
President Member Member
