The complainant is present in person. It is delivered in open Commission in 3 pages 2 sheets of paper.

BY - SRI SAURAV CHANDRA, MEMBER

1. Brief facts of the Complainant’s case are that the Opposite Party is a Private Bank with whom the Complainant has a Bank Account No.50200046086932 for business transaction under the name and style of Jana Tailors & Cloth Merchant.

2. All on a sudden i.e. on 02.10.2021 without any knowledge or consent of the Complainant, the Op debited Rs.4,000.00, Rs.5,000.00 and Rs.1,000.00 respectively i.e. Rs.10,000.00 in total from the said bank account of the Complainant.

3. Then the Complainant lodged a complaint on 02.10.2021 to the Customer Care Phone Banking vide Docket No.MUMP1021032560 and accordingly the issue was resolved by the Op with crediting the said deducted amount on 16.10.2021. But, unfortunately again on 25.10.2021 the said amount was debited from the said bank account.

4. Thereafter, the Complainant made several requests over phone and email to resolve the issue but, the Op didn’t pay any heed.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that, there werealso some disputes with the Op in relation to the Credit Card of the Complainant issued by the Op as mentioned in the Complaint but, subsequently the same was resolved by way of settlement as informed during hearing with producing supporting evidences.

6. Thereafter, the Petitioner preferred to file the instant case before this Commission.

7. The cause of action of this case arose on and from 01.11.2021.

The Complainant, therefore, prays for directing the Op:-

1. To take necessary steps for rendering the proper service by the Op and resolve the issue regarding the account of the Complainant.

2. To pay Compensation of Rs.10,000.00 for deficiency of service and mental       harassment and agony.

3. To pay Litigation Cost to the Complainant for conducting the case.

4. Any other order/orders as this Commission deed fit and proper.

8. Notice was duly served upon the Op but, Op preferred to see that the case be decided ex-parte against it.

9. Under the above circumstances, the Complainant has prayed for ex-parte order against the Op.

10. Points for determination are:

1. Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?                
2. Is the Complainant entitled to the relief(s) as sought for?

11. Decision with reasons

1. Both the points I and II, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.

2. We have carefully perused the Petition of the Complainant evidence adduced along with all papers and other documents.

3. Having regards had to the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of evidence, it is evident that there is no dispute that the Complainant is a consumer having grievances against the Op, as such the case is maintainable in its present form and in law.

4. Having regards had to the unchallenged evidence of the Complainant, it clearly transpires in the Bank Statement of the Complainant as to why an auto debit of Rs.10,000.00 in total was done by the Op from his Bank Account on 02.10.2021.Nowhere the Complainant also denied about these transactions but, simply mentioned that the transactions were made without his knowledge or consent. Besides, he has not specifically mentioned anywhere in complaint that he did not use the “POS 514834xxxxxx1564 PAYTM” on 02.10.2021 as mentioned in the Bank Statement. In the Amended Petition dated: 05.08.2022, the Complainant also not prayed/claimed for the said deducted amount of Rs.10,000.00. Rather, the Complainant failed to produce supporting evidence in respect of his claim whereas his submitted supporting document i.e. Bank Statement is a clear evidence for intimation of transactions by the Bank Authority to it’s Customer. The Complainant fails to prove his any grievances against the Op. Moreover, it appears that the bank account is not in the name of the Complainant but, in the name of his business namely Jana Tailors & Cloth Merchant. Thus, the case is bad for misjoinder of party. Therefore, it clearly transpires from the above that there are no elements of negligence, unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by the OP.

5. Now, coming to the matter of reliefs. The Complainant is not eligible for any relief.

6. Both the points are decided accordingly.

7. Thus, the Complaint case does not succeed.

Hence, it is

          O R D E R E D

That the CC-04 of 2022 be and the same is dismissed ex-parte.

Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the Complainant free of costs.

The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this   judgment.