BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE.
DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2021
PRESENT
MR. RAVISHANKAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI : MEMBER
APPEAL NO. 523/2013
State Bank of Mysore, Chikkaballapur Branch, B.B. Road, Near Vani Talkies, Chikkaballapur. (By Sri P.L. Vijay Kumar) | ……Appellant/s |
V/s
Dr. Shirish.R.Naik, No.2, Behind BBMP Refressal Hospital, Cambridge Road, Halasuru, Bangalore 560 008. (By Sri R.S. Manjunath) | …Respondent/s |
ORDER
BY SRI RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. The appellant/Opposite Party has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.25.02.2013 passed in CC.No.2064/2012 on the file of 3rd Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore which directed the Opposite Party to credit the amount of Rs.20,000/- with interest along with costs of Rs.2,000/-.
2. The facts leading to the appeal are as hereunder;
It is the case of the complainant that he is a SB Account bearing No.30162551063 holder of Opposite Party bank who obtained ATM card for withdrawal of amount and other transactions. On 09.07.2011, he tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- at the ATM established by the Opposite Party bank at Chikkaballapur, but, he had not received an amount of Rs.3,000/- and the transaction of Rs.2,000/- was successful. Immediately, he raised a complaint and after enquiry slip, he noticed that a sum of Rs.20,000/- along with Rs.3,000/- also debited to his account. After receipt of the complaint, the Opposite Party bank have credited an amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.20,000/- respectively on 16.07.2011 and 18.07.2011. Thereafter, on 22.07.2011, the Opposite Party bank redebited the amount of Rs.20,000/- as it reflected that the transaction for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- was successful. The complainant alleged that without his consent, the Opposite Party bank have debited an amount of Rs.20,000/- from his account and he has not received any said amount on 09.07.2011 at Chikkaballapur ATM, hence, alleged deficiency in service and filed a complaint before the District Commission. After trial, the District Commission allowed a complaint holding that there is an error in the ATM which was installed by the Opposite Party bank and they have wrongly debited the amount from complainant’s account inspite of non-receipt of the amount at ATM, Chikkaballapur.
3. Aggrieved by the said Order, the appellant/ Opposite Party is in appeal. Heard the arguments.
4. On going through the memorandum of appeal and certified copy of the Order, there is no dispute that the complainant had an SB Account bearing No. 30162551063 at Opposite Party bank who availed ATM card facility for transaction. It is also not in dispute that on 09.07.2011 the complainant tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- at Opposite Party bank ATM at Chikkaballapur, but, the transaction was not successful towards Rs.3,000/- and the same was credited to his account on 16.07.2011. The complainant at that junction of time, he received an enquiry slip stating that the amount of Rs.20,000/- also withdrawn from ATM for which he complained and accordingly, the Opposite Party bank have credited the same on 18.07.2011. Subsequently after verification and investigation, the Opposite Party bank have took back by debiting the said amount of Rs.20,000/- from the account of the complainant on 22.07.2011 whereas the complainant alleged that the said reversal of the amount amounts to deficiency in service.
5. The appellant/Opposite Party has categorically noted that there is an error code found in the transaction slip i.e. 000 which indicates that the transaction was successful and if the code was 0014 it is a requisition for enquiry of balance amount. But, the District Commission has wrongly appreciated the said code as an error for non-receipt of the amount from the complainant and awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- as refund. But we are of the opinion that when the transaction was successful and the code reflects as 000 in the transaction slip and in the transaction chart maintained by the Opposite Party bank, it is definitely gives a meaning that the complainant has withdrawn an amount of Rs.20,000/- and the transaction was successful. That’s why on 22.07.2011 the Opposite Party bank has redebited the amount which was credited to the complainant’s account on 18.07.2011. The transaction at ATM is not under the control of bank. The Opposite Party is only depends upon the transaction reflected in the computer and they rely on the computer generated transaction slips. When the slip indicates code 000, it is definitely a transaction was successful and amount was debited. As such, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as awarded by the District Commission. The District Commission has made an error in not appreciating the computer generated transaction slip provided by the Opposite Party bank. As such, the Order passed by the District Commission is set aside. Hence, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is allowed. Consequently, the complaint is dismissed.
The amount in deposit shall be refunded to the appellant.
Forward free copies to both parties.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
KCS*
