Delhi

North East

CC/257/2015

Dheeraj Kr. Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Manager/Head Of Department Corporation Bank of India - Opp.Party(s)

06 Sep 2017

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 257/15

 

In the matter of:

 

		Dheeraj Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Bihari Lal Sharma R/o H.No.E-839, Lohia Gali No. 4 East Babar Pur, Delhi-110053.		Complainant
		Versus
	1           2	M/s Chief Manager/ Branch Manager/ Head of Department Corporation Bank of India Branch Gujrawala Town, Near Model Town, Delhi   M/s Chief Manager/ Branch Manager/ Head of Department Central Bank of India Jyoti Colony, Delhi-110032.		Opposite Parties
			DATE OF INSTITUTION:		23.07.2015
			JUDGEMENT RESERVED ON:		06.09.2017
			DATE OF DECISION      :		06.09.2017

 

Shri N. K. Sharma, President:-

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya, Member:-

 

ORDER

 

1. Jurisdiction of the firm has been invoked by Shri Dheeraj Kumar Sharma, the complainant alleging deficiency in services by Chief Manager, Corporation Bank – OP1 and Chief Manager, Central Bank of India- OP2.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that the complainant has saving account bearing no. 054900101730570 with Corporation Bank of India- OP1 for which a ATM card was issued. On 8.6.2015 at 08:15 p.m., the complainant used the ATM of OP2 for withdrawal of Rs. 10,000/-. However, no cash was dispensed. It is stated in the complaint that SMS was received on registered mobile number reflecting the withdrawal of Rs. 10,000/- as successful. On the receipt of the said SMS, the complainant immediately visited the ATM of OP2, where the failed transaction has taken place, he found that there was no security guard and the door of the ATM premises use to remain open. The complainant has stated that Rs. 10,000/- had been withdrawn by some unauthorized person. OP1 was apprised of the said transaction thereby requesting to lock the card of the complainant where he was informed that the same would take 24 hours and he was told that the deducted amount of Rs. 10,000/- would be credited within 24 hours as per bank policy. On 9.6.15, complainant lodged a police complaint with SHO, Police Station: Welcome and OP2. It is also stated that as there was no security guard at the ATM premises and OP2 had failed to provide services and security. Hence, the complainant has prayed for credit of Rs. 10,000/- to his account and Rs. 80,000/- as compensation for mental harassment.

Complaint dated 9.6.2015 to SHO, Police Station Welcome, application dated 9.6.2015 to OP2 for preservation of CCTV footage and letter to OP1 dated 9.6.15 have been annexed with the complaint.

3. Notice of present complaint was served upon OPs wherein OP1 filed their reply and took the plea that Rs. 10,000/- had been debited from the account of complainant as the said transaction was successful. It was stated that OP2 had also tendered No Excess Certificate dated 28.08.2015 alongwith Cash Report, Journal Record and Switch Report. As the transaction was successful no deficiency in service could be attributed on their part. Rest of the contents of the complaint were denied. No Excess Cash Certificate dated 28.08.2015, Cash Report, Journal Record and Switch Report have been annexed with the reply.
4. Neither any reply on behalf of OP2 was filed nor anyone appeared for OP2 despite service.
5. No rejoinder to written statement of OP1 and evidence by way of affidavit was filed by complainant despite several opportunities. However, evidence by way of affidavit was filed by OP1 wherein Shri Noorul Haque Sheikh, Attorney/ Senior Manager was examined who deposed on oath the contents of the reply. He got exhibited Ex RW 1/1 which is Power of Attorney, No Excess Certificate dated 28.08.2015 alongwith Cash Report, Journal Record and Switch Report are exhibited as Ex RW 1/2, Ex RW 1/3 & Ex RW 1/4 respectively.
6. We have perused the material placed on record. Complainant was directed to file his evidence on 3.12.2015 but he failed to file the same on subsequent dates and his right to file rejoinder affidavit was closed on 8.4.2016 and subsequently stopped appearing. OP1 has placed on record the Ex RW1/2 to R1/4 which are journal record, no excess cash certificate and switch report, which show that the said transaction was successful, these documents are auto-generated documents which can’t be manipulated. Hence, no deficiency in service can be attributed on OP1. Further complainant has stopped appearing for past many dates and has even failed to file his evidence by way of affidavit. Being so, the complainant has failed to prove his complaint. Hence, the present complaint is dismissed for want of prosecution.
7. File be consigned to record room.
8. Announced on  06.09.2017            

 

 

(N.K. Sharma) President

(Harpreet Kaur Charya) Member