Orissa

Malkangiri

CC/5/2022

Madhumita Mohanty, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Manager, State Bank of India, - Opp.Party(s)

Self

30 Aug 2022

ORDER

Heading1
Heading2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/5/2022
( Date of Filing : 03 Jan 2022 )
 
1. Madhumita Mohanty,
aged about 48 years, W/O Late Niranjan Patnaik, At. Women's College, Malkangiri, PO/PS/Dist. Malkangiri.
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Chief Manager, State Bank of India,
Malkangiri, At/PO/PS/Dist. Malkangiri.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Sri Prafulla Kumar Panda PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Rajesh Chodhuri MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
Dated : 30 Aug 2022
Final Order / Judgement

 

  1. The brief fact of the case of complainant she is having saving account with the O.P. bearing account no. 32106167033.  On 09.08.2021 she withdrew an amount of Rs. 7000/- from the ATM of O.P. situated near football ground, DNK, Malkangiri, but the same did not disburse to her whereas she updated her pass book and found that transaction shows as successful and Rs. 7000/- has been deducted from her account.  It is alleged that on the same day she lodged a written complaint to the O.P. requested for due enquiry, but on many occasions she was only assured for refund the same but no action taken in that regard.  It is also alleged that on September, 2021 she received one letter dated 06.09.2021 bearing no. BR/CUST/112/2020-21 wherein it is mentioned that since the transaction was successful as per EJ Log, the complaint of complainant has been closed.Thus suffering from mental agony and financial loss, she filed this case claiming refund of Rs. 7000/- with interest and Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation and costs.
  1. O.P. appeared through their Ld. Counsel, filed their counter version admitting that the complainant is having the account with them and about the transaction of Rs. 7000/- on dated 09.08.2021, but denied the allegations contending that as per the complaint dated 10.08.2021 of complainant regarding non disbursal of the alleged amount, they lodged the complaint on their Complaint Management System or CMS and verified the transaction and found the transaction was successful  as per the EJ Log of the AMT on that date and closed the complaint and the same was intimated to the complainant on dated 06.09.2021 and with other contentions, showing their no liability, they prayed to dismiss the case.
  1. Complainant has filed the copy of pass book, copy of complaint dated 09.08.2021 , copy of letter dated 06.09.2021 of O.P. whereas the O.P. has filed the copy of EJ Log of ATM of that date.  Perused the case record and material documents available therein.
  1. It is an admitted that complainant is having saving account with the O.P. and on 09.08.2021 there was a transaction of Rs.7000/-.  The allegation of complainant is that though she has made written complainant on the same day i.e. on 09.08.2021 where on 06.09.2021 O.P. replied that they have closed the complainant on being the transaction is successful.  We have verified the documents and found that complainant lodged the complaint with immediate effect, when she lost her amount whereas on 06.09.2021 the O.P. replied to the complaint of the complainant after lapse of about 30 days, whereas per the RBI guidelines the dispute related to ATM withdrawal should be resolved within 7 working day or else the concerned bank is liable to pay compensation as laid down there under.  But in the instant case, the O.P. replied the complaint of complainant after lapse of 30 days, which is not in accordance with the procedural guidelines of RBI in the present case.  Further the EJ Log filed by the O.P. only shows the  transaction is successful, but no evidence is filed by the O.P. that complainant has received the alleged disputed amount by producing cogent evidence like CCTV footage of that specific day of transaction.Further the O.P. should have also filed the details of entire transaction of that day showing that how much amount they have kept in the ATM machine and about the remaining balance.And without such transaction register, it cannot be believable that the complainant received the alleged disputed amount and the plea of O.P. will not do from any angle. Hence in our view, complainant is entitled her lost amount.
  1. Further it is observed that only to get her lost amount, complainant tried her level best but did not get any result, which definitely caused mental agony and financial harassment, for which she knocks the door of the Commission.   Hence this order.

                                                                                                              ORDER

          The complaint petition is allowed in part.  The O.P. herewith directed to refund the disputed amount of Rs. 7000/- with its prevailing rate of interest as on 09.08.2021 till the date of this order alongwith compensation of Rs. 5,000/- towards causing mental agony and financial loss and Rs. 3,000/- towards costs of litigation to the complainant and all the direction should be complied within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the lost amount of Rs. 7,000/- shall carry interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of loss i.e. 09.08.2021 till payment.

          Pronounced in the open Court on this the 30th day of August, 2022.  Issue free copy to the parties concerned.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sri Prafulla Kumar Panda]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Rajesh Chodhuri]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.