DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016

Case No. 177/2015

Shri Jagdish Prasad

S/o Shri Jugal Kihore,

R/o 61, Ranaji Encalve,

South-West Delhi, Najafgarh,

New Delhi-110043.                                                            ….Complainant

Versus

1. The Manager

HDFC Bank Ltd.

E-143, Saket,

New Delhi-110017                                         

2. Axis Bank

Saket Branch

E-146, Saket

New Delhi-110017                                                  ….Opposite Parties

                                                Date of Institution                    : 10.07.2015        Date of Order        : 17.03.2020

Coram:

Ms. Rekha Rani, President

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member

ORDER

1. Brief facts as pleaded by the complainant are that the complainant has Saving Bank Account with HDFC Bank Ltd. (OP-1). Debit card for the said account was issued by OP-1 to the complainant for easy cash withdrawals.
   1. The complainant on 22.07.2014 tried to withdraw ₹ Rs.12,000/- using his ATM card in the Axis Bank ATM (OP-2) at Saket Metro Station, New Delhi. But no cash was dispensed from the ATM machine.
   2. It is averred that the above said place had three ATM machines. After the failed transaction from first ATM machine the complainant tried accessing the second ATM machine but no money was dispensed with from second ATM machine. Thereafter, the complainant had tried the third ATM machine and entered ₹10,000/- for withdrawal but again no money was dispensed with. However, the complainant got a message on his mobile that ₹10,000/- and ₹6,000/- was withdrawn from his account. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant never entered the amount of ₹6000/- for withdrawal. It is further reiterated that no money was dispensed with from the ATM machine and amount of ₹16,000/- was deducted from complainant’s account.
   3. Complainant on 23.07.2014 complained to his bank and filled the ‘Cardholder Dispute Form’ on 04.08.2014 but no money was credited by OP-1 to the complainant’s account. Thereafter, on 04.09.2014 the complainant received a mail from OP-1 stating that according to the RBI guidelines in the matter of dispute pertaining to non/ short dispensation need to be resolved by way of ‘Charge Back’, wherein the acquiring bank whose ATM was used, is to revert with the valid proof in the form of an ATM log indicating that the funds were successfully dispensed. Failing which the customer’s account is credited within 7 working days from the date of the complaint. OP-1 further stated in the mail that it had received valid proof indicating that ₹16,000/- has been successfully dispensed with from the ATM machine of Axis Bank. Complainant was not convinced with the mail of OP-1 and kept communicating with OP-1 to get the amount re-credited to his account but all in vain.
   4. Dissatisfied and aggrieved the complainant approached this Forum with the prayer to direct OP-1 to refund the deposit amount of ₹16,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% per annum and award ₹50,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and harassment and ₹30,000/- towards litigation expense.
2. OP-1 resisted the complaint inter-alia submitting that on receiving the complaint for the alleged transactions held on 22.07.2014   OP-1 raised the ‘Charge Back’ on the Axis Bank (OP-2). As per the report received from OP-2, the complainant made two transactions of ₹10,000/- and ₹6,000/- respectively from two different ATMs and both transaction were successful. The same was informed to the complainant on 04.09.2014 by an email. Copy of email, letter from Axis Bank and ATM log sheets are annexed as Annexure-A.

2.1     It is thus pleaded that OP-1 is not deficient in service as the alleged transactions were successful therefore it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed in the interest of justice.

3. OP-2 pleaded inter-alia that ₹16,000/- was successfully withdrawn from the complainant’s account as per various reports received from the ATM Cell like ATM log, EJ copy, ATM cash Balancing Repot and ATM Switch Report. It is submitted that as per records the complainant on 22.07.2014 had operated his HDFC Bank’s ATM card at ATM of OP-2 and vide transaction No. 4473 cash of ₹10,000/- was withdrawn and after that the available balance in the account of the complainant was ₹6,408/-. Thereafter, complainant operated another ATM of OP-2 and withdrew sum of ₹6,000/- with transaction No.3108. Hence, the complainant on the said date withdrew total sum of ₹16,000/- which was debited from his account. It is next submitted that there was no excess cash found in the ATM on that day. Denying any deficiency in service OP-2 prayed for dismissal of complaint.
4. Complainant opted not to file rejoinder. Evidence by way of affidavit of the complainant, Shri Vipin Kaushik, Branch Manager of OP-1 and Shri V.S. Babu, Deputy Vice President of OP-2 have been filed. 
5. Written arguments are filed by OP-1.
6. Oral submissions made on behalf of the parties are heard. Material placed on record is perused carefully.
7. Complainant alleges that his attempt to withdraw money from ATM of OP-2 failed and no money was dispensed from ATM of OP-2 whereas on 22.07.2014 ₹16,000/- was debited from his account. The claim of the complainant is refuted by OP-1 and OP-2. OP-1 to support his case has annexed the cash balancing report dated 13.09.2014, Log sheets procured from the acquiring bank i.e. OP-2 which confirms that the cash withdrawal was successful and requested amount was dispensed from the ATM.
8. OP-2 has adduced ATM log / EJ copy, ATM cash balancing report and ATM switch report. Copy of the same are annexed as Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-4 with the written statement of OP-2.
9. Going through the documents referred above, it is noticed that complainant’s card with the No. 5326-7601-1790-9437 was used thrice at the ATM of OP-2. At the first instance balance enquiry was made and available balance shown on 22.07.2014 at 19.34 (time) the available balance was ₹16,408/-. On the same day at 19.35 (time) cash of ₹10,000/- was withdrawn from the same account and the balance available left was ₹6,408/-. The said information is appended at page-14 with the written statement of OP-2. Further the Switch Data Report appended at page-36 confirms the same. The EJ/ log report at page no. 47 confirms that another transaction on 22.07.2014 at 19.37(time) was made wherein ₹6,000/- was withdrawn and the available balance left in the bank account of the complainant was ₹408/-. Switch Data Report of the same is appended at page-52. The cash balancing report appended at page-65 confirms that there was no excess cash found in the ATM on 22.07.2014.
10. OP-1 on receiving the complaint tried to resolve the issue and raised ‘Charge Back’ to the acquiring bank i.e. OP-2. OP-2 in reverted with the valid proof in the form of ATM log, Switch report and the cash balancing report and confirmed that ₹16,000/- was successfully dispensed with from the ATM of OP-2. From the documentary evidence placed on record, we find no deficiency of service on the part of OP-1 and OP-2 as cash of ₹16,000/- was dispensed from the ATM of OP-2 and it was rightly debited from the account of the complainant. We have no reasons to disbelieve the documentary evidence.
11. In view of the discussion above, the complaint is dismissed with no order as to cost.
12. Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 17.03.2020