1. The brief history of the case of the complainant is that she is holder of SB A/c No. 34608609125 with ATM facility under the Opp. Parties.  It is submitted that monthly salary of her husband deposited in the pass book and amount accumulated to Rs. 29,097/- as on 14.01.2017.  It is alleged that an amount of Rs. 29,093/- have been missing from the said pass book on a single date i.e. on 06.03.2017 and on approach to the O.P. No. 1 on 10.03.2017 to replace her amount in her S.B. Account, who did not take any action, as such complainant lodged complaint with the I.I.C., Malkangiri P.S. but did not get any result, thus showing deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, she filed this case with a prayer to direct the O.Ps to refund her missing amount of Rs. 29,097/- with interest and Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- towards compensation and costs of litigation to her.
    
2. The OPs appeared though their Ld. Counsel and filed counter denying the allegations of the complaint and contended that as per guideline of using the ATM card is not to disclose the secret code number as well as card number to anybody is remanded through newspaper and other media not to divulge any personal information to unknown person which may caused financial loss and basing upon such guidelines, they have also contended that the complainant has not prove through affidavit or nowhere mentioned that she is the only user and in kept of purely in personal secret custody of the card and other contentions showing their no liability, they have prayed to dismiss the case. 
    
3. Both the parties have filed certain documents in support of their cases.  Heard from the parties through their respective A/Rs and perused the materials available on record.
    
4. In this case, the SB A/c no. 34608609125 with ATM facility under the Opp. Parties obtained by the complainant from the O.P.  is an admitted fact.  The case of the complainant is that monthly salary of her husband deposited in the pass book and amount accumulated to Rs. 29,097/- as on 14.01.2017. Complainant filed document to that effect.  It is ascertained that an amount of Rs. 29,093/- have been missing from the said pass book on a single date i.e. on 25.02.2017 and complainant filed document to that effect.  On approach to the O.P. No. 1 on 10.03.2017 to replace her amount in her S.B. Account, who did not take any action, as such complainant lodged complaint with the I.I.C., Malkangiri P.S.  Complainant also filed document to that effect.  It is ascertained from the record that the O.Ps have never been challenged the documents filed by the complainant.Whereas, the O.Ps have filed only the document to show that the amount was missing on dated 25.02.2017.From the above documents of parties, it is established that Rs. 29,093/- have been missing from the account of complainant.
    
5. The only points to be decided in this case is that whether the missing amount was withdrawn through any online transaction by a stranger  being the secret number is disclosed by the complainant.  
    
6. If the submissions of O.P. is to be considered, than it is the duty of the O.P. to prove their submissions by producing cogent evidence, hence oral submissions cannot be believable at this stage.Whereas, the complainant has filed documents like (i) written complaint made to the O.Ps and (ii) written complaint lodged with the IIC, Malkangiri Police to prove his submissions and the same were never been challenged by the O.Ps. However the O.Ps have filed only the copy of statement of account which reflects that all the transaction were made through PoS on the same date.In this circumstances, it is a matter of surprise that how it can bepossible that all the transactions were made on the same day at different accounts with different place, whereas the ATM card is available with the complainant. Further it is seen that though the O.Ps have received the complaint from the complainant but did not take any steps to sort out the alleged disputes, rather they kept silent for years nor they have informed anything about the missing amount to the complainant.
    
7. Now it became clear from the counter of the O.Ps that if the ATM card of the complainant is with him all along, how it could be possible to use the same ATM Card with different platforms at different places on the same day.  In the light of their contentions, the OPs have not filed any documentary evidences.  Therefore, it can be concluded that though the ATM Card was with the complainant as such the amount has been fraudulently withdrawn by somebody from the said account for which the complainant has no fault. Further the OPs in their counter have clearly admitted that there are 8 nos. of transaction have been made on 25.02.2017, but miserably failed to prove that all the transactions were done  by complainant himself or  the secret code was disclosed by him to any stranger, which is nothing but only an imaginary submissions and the same clearly proves the inability and inefficiency on the part of the bank to protect the hard earnings of their valuable customers, which are under their custody and such type of activity on part of the OP – Bank is nothing but only to cause loss and harass their customers.
    
8. Further, it is well known to the OPs that the ATM and its server are with them.  Any tempering and misuse to the machines is the fault of the OPs for which the poor customer at no stretch of imagination can be suffered.  For the safeguard of the interest of consumers and for protection of their hard earned money, the OPs should work hard and the help of enforcement agencies should be taken to find out their fault and apprehend the culprits.  Necessary technologies must be adopted so that the culprits’ access could be restrained to such fraudulent withdrawal.  Simply stating that disclosing of secret code number will not do but to act for the interest of their valued customers, as the OP – Bank who are in banking business and earning profit out of amount deposited by their customer.    
    
9. In the above facts and circumstances, it can be concluded in the case in hand that a sum of Rs. 29,093/- has been fraudulently withdrawn from the account of the complainant when the ATM card and PIN was in his possession for which the OPs are liable and the complainant is entitled to get back his money with interest, further for such withdrawals, the complainant must have suffered some mental agony and also filed this case incurring some expenditures, for which he is entitled for some compensation and costs.  Considering his suffering we feel a sum of Rs. 3,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- towards compensation and costs will meet the ends of justice.  
   
                                                                                            ORDER
   
   That the complaint petition is allowed in part and the OPs being jointly and severally liable are directed to credit Rs. 29,093/- with simple interest @ 6% p.a. from 25.02.2017 till payment and to pay Rs. 3,000/- towards compensation and Rs. 2,000/- towards costs of litigation to the complainant within 30 days from the date of the communication of this order.

           Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 16^th day of November, 2019. 

          Issue free copies to the parties concerned.