BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT  HYDERABAD.

FA  257 of 2014  against  CC 679  of 2012 , Dist. Forum-II, Hyderabad

Between:

V. Preethi Reddy

D/o. V. Rajgopal Reddy

Advocate,  H.No. 3-5-942

Himayathnagar

Hyderabad-500 029.                                   ***                         Appellant/

Complainant

                                                                   Vs.

1)  The Manager

ICICI Bank Ltd.

Charge Bank Department

414, Sardarpatel Bagh

Lower Parale,

Bombay.

2)  ICICI Bank Ltd.

Rep. by its Branch Manager

Himayathnagar Branch

D.No. 3-6-268,

Himayathnagar

Main Road, Opp: Telugu Academy

Himayatnagar, Hyderabad-29.

                                                                    ***                       Respondents/

Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Appellant:                           M/s.  Abid Ali

Counsel for the Respondents:                     P.I.P.  

CORAM:     

            HON’BLE SRI  JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, PRESIDENT

        SRI S. BHUJANGA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

                                      &

                             SRI  R. L. NARASIMHA RAO,  HON’BLE MEMBER

Oral Order :   08/08/2014 

(Per Hon’ble Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada, President)

                                                                   ***

1)                This appeal is directed against the order dt. 25.10.2013 made in CC 679 of 2012 on the file of Dist. Forum-II, Hyderabad whereby the complaint filed by the appellant herein was dismissed for default. 

2)                The appellant/complainant filed a complaint before the Dist. Forum alleging that an amount of Rs. 20,000/- was withdrawn from her account through ICICI bank ATM though the ATM-cum-Debit Card is in her custody.   The complainant alleges that by making duplicate ATM Card some miscreants siphoned off the money from her account.     As the Opposite Parties failed to come to her rescue, the complainant was constrained to approach the Dist. Forum. 

3)                The Opposite Parties filed written version contending that the complaint is not maintainable against them as the complainant is not their customer.  Further the complaint is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties i.e., State Bank of Hyderabad.  Video clippings could not be given to the police due to technical snag in the ATM camera.  The Opposite Parties are not liable for the mis-use of ATM-cum-Debit Card issued by State Bank of Hyderabad in favour of complainant. 

4)                The Dist. Forum dismissed the complaint of appellant/complainant for default and non-payment of costs imposed by it.

5)                As stated supra, challenging the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal.

6)                Counsel for the appellant/complainant and representative of Respondents Bank are present.  As the complaint was dismissed for default but not on merits, we are of the considered  opinion that  an  opportunity may be given to the appellant/complainant, however, for laches  on payment of costs Rs. 500/-  (Rupees Five Hundred Only) to the Bar  Association of this Commission.    We remand the matter to Dist. Forum for disposal of matter on merits. 

7)                The Dist. Forum shall restore the matter to its original file on production of receipt as to payment of costs ordered by this Commission and also the costs imposed by it earlier.    Further, the Dist. Forum  shall give sufficient opportunity  to both sides  to  lead evidence etc.,  and dispose of the matter in accordance with law.  As it is an old matter  pertaining to the year 2012  the Dist. Forum shall give utmost  priority  and dispose of the same within three months from the date of receipt of this order.   This appeal is disposed of accordingly.

1)      _______________________________

PRESIDENT        

2)           ________________________________

MEMBER  

3)           ________________________________

MEMBER  

*pnr

UP-LOAD – O.K.