DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 08 of 2020

 

 

Smt. Arati Saha,

W/O. Sri Ranada Ranjan Saha,

Mahim Lane, Bhagaban Thakur Chowmohani,

P.O.-Agartala, P.S.-East Agartala, Pin-799001,

Dist.-West Tripura, Agartala….......................................................................Complainant.

 

 

 

 

 

-VERSUS-

 

 

 

 

1. Chief Manager,

S.B.I. TLAH Branch,

Colonel Chowmohni, Branch, Agartala, P.O.-Agartala, 

P.S.-East Agartala, Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799001.................................... Opposite Party.

 

 

 

 

 

     __________PRESENT__________

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

 

DR (SMT)  BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

 

For the Complainant : Sri Bhupal Ch. Biswas.

  Advocate. 

 

For the O.P. : Sri Prabir Saha,

  Sri Sujit Kr. Banerjee,

  Advocates. 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON : 08/03/2021.

J U D G M E N T

          The Complainant Smt. Arati Saha, set the law in motion by presenting the complaint petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  complaining deficiency of service as well as unfair trade practice by the O.P. 

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant has a saving bank A/C numbering 30015423336 in the S.B.I., TLA House Branch, Colonel Chowmhany, Agartala and she has also a ATM A/C in the said branch numbering Card No.5103720458368451. The Complainant is suffering from acute type of arthritis and cannot walk for which her ATM A/C is operated by her husband in the nearby ATM booth at Bhagaban Thakur Chowmhani, Agartala. On 17/09/2019 at about 9 A.M. When her husband went to the aforesaid ATM booth to withdraw money he found to his utter surprise that inspite of money lying inside machine, no money was coming. He then collected a Mini Statement where from he found that on 16/09/2019 Rs.60,000/-(Rupees sixty thousand) i.e.  (Rs.20,000/- + Rs.40,000/-) and on 17/09/2019 Rs.60,000/- (Rupees sixty thousand) (Rs.40,000/- + Rs.20,000/-) i.e. in total Rs.1,20,000/-(Rupees one lakh twenty thousand) was stolen by the hackers from her ATM A/C. The hackers committed this offence at Jwalapuri on 17/09/2019 at 10 A.M. The petitioner by a petition addressed to the Manager, SBI, TLAH Branch blocked her ATM A/C. On 18/09/2019 at 10.30 A.M. her husband on behalf her lodged a complaint (FIR) to the O.C., East Agartala, P.S. Thereafter, on 18/09/2019 at 3 P.M. claim was made to SBI, TLAH Branch, Colonel Chowmhani, Agartala by a letter addressed to the Chief Manager of the Branch stating full facts of the incident. Copy of the FIR and Bank Statement etc. were tagged with the claim petition for refund. At last bank authority refunded the money but they did not pay any interest on the said amount. 

So, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the conduct of the O.P.,  the Complainant alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practices has filed the instant complaint before this Commission claiming compensation for causing harassment, mental agony plus other benefit as admissible and interest @12% per annum from the O.P.  

 

2. On admission of the complaint notice was issued upon the O.P. and thereafter O.P. has appeared by engaging Lawyer namely Sri Prabir Saha and sought for time for filing written objection. Thereafter written objection was submitted on behalf of the O.P. 

           In the written statement the O.P. stated that the complaint is not maintainable as the Complainant suppressed the facts of her own fault for which she has caused the loss. It is further stated that the hacker party obtained all the information from the husband of the Complainant in respect of the Card No. as well as PIN Code No. and it was the fault of the Complainant for which an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- were withdrawn by the hacker party. It is further stated that the Bank Authority always cautioned the Consumer by sending SMS not to share the date of birth, Aadhar Number, OTP, PIN Code & C.V. Number in any way to unknown person but husband of the Complainant shared the secret PIN Code as well as ATM Card Number. So, it is their own fault and there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.P. 

           It is further stated that the O.P. on 18/09/2019 came to learn about the facts of withdrawal of money from the letter sent by the Complainant. Then after, proper investigation it was recommended that the said amount of Rs.1,20,000/- would be refunded to the account of the Complainant though there was fault of the Complainant. Ultimately, the  amount was refunded to the account of the Complainant but they are not entitled to get any interest as hacking was occurred due to their fault. It was further submitted that the complaint is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed.         

 

3. EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PARTIES:-

  Husband of the Complainant has examined himself as PW-I and he has submitted his examination-in-Chief by way of Affidavit. In this case the complainant produced 6 documents comprising 08 sheets under a Firisti dated 22/01/2020. The documents are namely First information Report dated 23/09/2019, FIR in connection with stealing of money from ATM Card No.5103720458368451 dated 23/09/2019, Statement(ATM Slip), Statement for Account(Bank Statement), Information letter to the Chief Manager of SBI, TLAH Branch, Agartala, Aadhar Card of Smt. Arati Saha & Permanent Account Number of Smt. Arati Saha. 

          O.P. adduced no evidence, but submitted some documents by Firisti.         

POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:-

    Based on the contentions raised by the Complaint as well as written statement and having regard to the evidence adduced by the parties, the following points cropped up for determination:   

    (I). Whether the O.P. has committed any deficiency of service towards the Complainant and have also indulged an unfair trade practices?

  (II).Whether the complainant is entitled to get  any compensation/relief as prayed for?

 

5. ARGUMENTS:

At the time of argument the Counsel of the O.P. remained absent. A chance was also given for filing written argument but O.P. failed. The Complainant submitted his written argument. 

 

 

6. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:

       All the points are taken-up together for convenience. 

     We have carefully gone through the complaint, written reply as well as evidence including Exhibited documents.        

       On perusal of the pleadings, we find that the Complainant got her missing money i.e. an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- by way of refund but the allegation is that the O.P. did not make payment of interest on the said amount. From the pleadings as well as from the evidence we find that the ATM Card was issued in the name of Smt. Arati Saha but it was used by her husband since long. From the written reply of the O.P. we also find that the husband of the Complainant disclosed / shared the secret PIN Code Number as well as ATM Card Number by which hacker party withdrew the money. 

           There is no dispute that the ATM Card was used by the husband of the Complainant which is most illegal. In this regard husband of the Complainant failed to show any authority as to how he was entitled to use the ATM Card of his wife. So we can easily say that the husband of the Complainant or the Complainant has violated the terms and conditions of the ATM Card.     

We found another think that one FIR was lodged by the husband of the Complainant on 23/09/2019 and in the ejahar it was mentioned that on 12/09/2019 at about 9.30 A.M.  at the ATM centre situated at Bhagaban Thakur Chowmhany while he was taking a mini statement one unknown person aged at about 25 years perhaps involved in the matter of hacking. But this fact is suppressed in the complaint petition.  

From the oral evidence adduced by the husband of the Complainant, we find that no where he gave any statement rebutting the fact of disclosure of PIN Code Number as well as ATM Card Number to the hacker party. So, we are of the opinion that the Complainant failed to adduce sufficient evidence to justify her claim.  

On overall appreciation of the entire facts and position of law regarding using of ATM Card, we are in the opinion that the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as they have violated the terms and conditions of ATM Card. 

 

 

7. In the result, it is decided that the Complainant has failed to prove his case by way of adducing sufficient evidence in support of the allegation of deficiency in service by the O.P. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed and no costs. 

Supply a certified copy of the order to the Complainant free of cost. 

    Announced.

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

  DR  (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

 MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA