DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA

CONSUMER  COMPLAINT  CASE NO. 25 OF 2015

Om Prakash Sharma, ( 66 Yrs.),

S/O: Prabhu Dayal Sharma,

R/O: Gumadera, PO/PS: Belpahar,

PS/ Dist-.Jharsuguda, Odisha…………………………………..……………. Complainant.

                                           Versus 

Central Bank of India, Belpahar Branch,

At: TRL Township, Corporation Society Building,

RO/PO/PS: Belpahar,

Dist: Jharsuguda, Odisha…..................................................................... Opp. Party.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant                                      Shri D.K. Patel, Adv. & Associates.

For the Opp. Party                                        Shri S.K.Dash,Adv. & Associates.

Date of Order: 06.01.2016

                                                                                               Present

                                                                                    1. Shri S.L. Behera, President.

                                                                                  2. Smt. A.Nanda, Sr. Member.

Shri S. L. Behera, President : - The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant is a saving bank account holder of O.P’s bank having account No. 1935611818. The account was running smoothly. On dtd. 15.02.2014 the complainant received a message on his phone that Rs. 100/- only has been withdrawn from his said account and subsequently amounts were withdrawn repeatedly 32 times up to dated 20.02.2014. Rs. 1,45,000 only in total had been withdrawn from the account fraudulently of the complainant. The complainant informed before the O.P about such incidence. Thereafter the O.P returned Rs. 46,900/- only. The complainant requested several times to return his balance amount Rs. 99,000/- but the O.P did not take any step for the same for which the complainant filed this case alleging deficiency in service against the O.Ps. and prayed for a direction to the O.P to return Rs. 99,000/- only with interest along with compensatory cost.

 After being noticed, the O.P filed his written version. The O.P submitted that the amounts withdrawn from the account was true, but denied all the  allegation made by the complainant. The O.P verified the account and noticed that some unknown persons are using the account of complainant for online purchasing. Such incident were also held with other ATM card holders such as Manoj Traders, Sonia Jha, Arun Kumar Purohit, Virender Kaur, Mandakini Roy and Debender Moharana. After receiving complaints from above mentioned victims the O.P intimated the facts to his superior authority via email. After receiving the detail report of enquiry from Regional office, Sambalpur the O.P informed the receiving Bank about the fraudulent transactions of debit card through online purchase, the receiving Banks were refused to accept the online transaction and refunded Rs.46,900/- only which returned to the complainant and the rest amount of Rs.99,000/- has been transacted in consideration of goods supplied through online purchase. The O.P further submitted that the complainant had not taken proper precaution of the secret PIN number of his debit card and prayed for dismissal of case.

After hearing from both the sides it revealed that fraudulent transaction of money had taken place not only from the account of complainant but also from the accounts of seven others by some unknown culprits. The O.P is also agreed on fraudulent withdrawn of money and tried his best to recover money from receiving Banks to whom funds were transferred. The O.P returned Rs. 46,900/- to the complainant but failed to return the rest amount of Rs.99,000/- only. In connection to this case the complainant has filed a citation of Hon’ble  National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which is similar to this case. A case between Bidyawanti vrs. State Bank of India & Ors. vide Revision Petition no. 4868 of 2012 in which the Hon’ble NCDRC (National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission) has restored the order of Dist. Forum where the Dist. Forum had allowed the Complaint Case of complainant along with interest. In an another similar case between Dr. Subhash Chandra vrs. State Bank of India bearing First Appeal No. 735 of 2013 in which Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission of Haryana had also held by allowing the Compliant Case in favour of the complainant.

In view of above decisions and on the above facts and circumstances we are in considered opinion to allow the complaint of complainant with following directions to the O.P.

ORDER

1.  The O.P is  hereby directed to return Rs.99,000/-  (Rupees Ninety Nine thousand) only with bank interest from the date of fraudulent withdrawn till the date of realisation.
2. The O.P is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,000/-( Rupees three thousand) only towards harassment, mental agony including litigation cost.
3. All the above mentioned orders are to be carried out within one month form he date of receipt  of this order, failing which the O.P. will pay interest @6% p.a on the above amounts till realisation.

            Accordingly the case is disposed of.

Order pronounced in the open court today the 06^th   day of January’ 2016 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule. 

                                                         I Agree.         

                                           A.Nanda, Member (W)                              S.L.Behera, President          

                                Dictated and corrected by me.

                                S.L.Behera, President