DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JHARSUGUDA
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO. 06 OF 2014
Ajay Kumar
S/O-Jagannath Prasad
Qtr.No. E/40/01, Railway Colony, Jharsuguda,
PO/PS-Jharsuguda, Odisha………..……………………….…… Complainant.
Versus
Chief Manager,
State Bank Of India,
Jharsuguda Main Branch
PO/PS-Jharsuguda, Odisha………………………………………….Opp. Party
Counsel for the Parties:-
For the Complainant Self
For the Opp. Party No. Shri K.C. Agrawal, Adv. & Associates.
Date of Order: 09.07.2014
Present
1. Shri S. K. Ojha, President In-Charge.
2. Smt. A. Nanda, Member (W).
Shri S.K. Ojha, President In-Charge :- The case filed by the complainant against the O.P on withdrawal of money through ATM Card having a S.B Account holder of O.P, bearing Account No. 11346789114 with having an ATM Card bearing No. 759150057153640.
In brief, the facts of complainant’s case is that, on dtd. 03.12.2013 at about 13.15 hrs. the complainant went to withdraw Rs.20,000/- only from an ATM counter of Jharsuguda Railway Station, where after inserting ATM Card in the ATM machine he noticed that the key board was not functioning properly and neither money nor any slip were delivered from the said ATM machine. Immediately he wanted to lodge complaint and found that there was no any security guard at the said ATM counter. Afterwards the complainant went to another ATM counter at Beheramal, Jharsuguda and withdrawn Rs.10,000/- only from there, but after observing the Mini Statement, he found that Rs.20,000/- has already been deducted from his said S.B Account. On the vary day the complainant lodged complaint at S.B.I, Main Branch, Jharsuguda and made a written complaint to the Chief Manager, S.B.I, Jharsuguda on dtd. 16.12.2013. On repeatedly approaching, the O.P did not respond on the matter of complainant, hence this case. After being noticed, the O.P appeared and filed written version through his counsel submitting the facts of S.B. Account and ATM Card of the complainant, but denied all the allegations imposed by the complainant. The O.P further submitted that, the complainant should be aware about the general guidelines and the safety tips provided to him at the time issuing ATM Card and mentioned that on dtd. 03.12.2013 at about 13.36 hrs. the transaction of Rs.20,000/- only was successful and there was an another successful transaction of Rs.10,000/- only at about 13.59 hrs. The complainant should lodge complaint before police authority for enquiry and investigation on the incident. The C.C.T.V footage of ATM counter is preserved for three months only from the date of transaction. The further more submitted that there is no provision for security guards to be posted at ATM counters rather it is posted wherever practicable as additional securities measures and prayed for dismissal of the case.
Heard from parties in length, perused the materials available in the case record. In support of his case, the O.P filed a citation of Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in a case between State Bank of India Vrs. Om Prakash Saini 2013(1)CPR 398 (NC) wherein it has held that, “xxxxxx Complainant has not proved any written protest made to bank authorities immediately and has based his claim only on the basis of information given on toll-free number of opposite party- Non supply of video footage had no bearing on claim of complainant and on this deficiency claim could not have been allowed by District Forum and upheld by State Commission- xxxxxx.” But present case has different facts and circumstances in comparison to the above mentioned case decided by Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi.
In this case, after non receiving the withdrawing amount of Rs.20,000/- only or any slip from the ATM counter / booth located near Jharsuguda Railway Station by the complainant, through ATM card bearing No. 759150057153640 of the complainant, on dtd. 03.12.2013, the complainant immediately wanted to intimate the incident to the concerned security guard if presented their, but unfortunately after not finding any security guard presented there, the complainant thereafter went to an another ATM counter / booth situated at Beheramal, Jharsuguda from where he successfully withdrawn Rs.10,000/- only and after noticing the Mini Statement, he found that, Rs.20,000/- only has been debited from his said SB account from which he has not withdrawn. Immediately the complainant lodged compliant before the Chief Manager on the same day in the complaint format namely “UNIFORM COMPLAIN TEMPLATE” and filed a written complaint to the said Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Jharsuguda Branch on dtd. 16.12.2013 regarding intimating and requesting to look after on the said incidence happened with the complainant in withdrawing money and asked for CCTV footage, which has been duly received with seal and signature by the said authority of bank. Thus, the present case is having completely different facts and circumstances with the above mentioned case, cited by the O.P.As per the O.P, the said transaction in question of Rs.20,000/- only was successful on dtd. 03.12.2013 while as per the complainant, he has not received the same. In the present circumstance it is very hard to say that, whether the complainant has really withdrawn the money in question or not. To avoid such incidence there are C.C.T.V camera installed in each and every ATM Counter. It is the only source to know the actual facts or any incidence occurs at the time of withdrawing of money, where the O.P failed to produce the recordings of the said movement in question through C.C.T.V footage. As per the O.P the C.C.T.V footage automatically destroyed after a period of three months but in the present case the complainant requested and asked to shown the C.C. T.V footage on the same day and on dtd. 16.12.2013 through writing but the O.P failed to prove the same.
It is the prime duty of the O.P( Bank ) to provide safety and security measures to the ATM Account holders while withdrawing money through ATM. In this case the complainant is found to be followed almost all necessary steps/ formalities in intimating the matter and asking his disputed amount which has been debited by mistake or through any fraudulent activities to/ from the concerned authority of Bank(O.P). Subsequently the O.P by taking not any necessary step to recover or even to know the fact by showing the actual incidence through C.C. T.V footage and such negligent activities reflects nothing but clear deficiency in service on the part of the O.P (Bank).
Hence, we are in considered opinion to allow the complaint petition with directions to the O.P to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- ( Rupees twenty thousand) only to the complainant towards disputed amount and pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- ( Rupees one thousand) only to the complainant towards litigation cost within one month from the date of this order, failing which the O.P shall be liable to pay interest @ 10% per annum till realization on the abovementioned awarded amounts.
Accordingly the case is disposed of.
Order pronounced in the open court today the 09th day of July’ 2014 and copy of this order shall be supplied to the parties as per rule.
I Agree.
Sd/- A.Nanda, Member (W) Sd/- S. K. Ojha, President In-Charge.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Sd/- S.K.Ojha, President In-Charge.