Delhi

East Delhi

CC/684/2015

ABHISHEK SRIVASTAVA - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI BANK - Opp.Party(s)

30 Nov 2016

ORDER

                 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, EAST, Govt of NCT Delhi

                  CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092                                  

                                                                                                  Consumer complaint no.        684/2015

                                                                                                  Date of Institution               15/09/2015

                                                                                                  Order Reserved on              30/11/2016

                                                                                                  Date of Order                        09/11/2016  

                                                                                                        

In matter of

Mr Abhishekh Srivastava, adult   

S/o Sh A L Srivastava  

R/o-C 76, West Vinod Nagar,  

Delhi 110092……………………....………..……………….………….Complainant

                                                                   

                                                                         Vs

The Branch Manager

ICICI Bank,  

Mayur Vihar Phase II, Delhi 110092 ..………………………….Respondent

 

Complainant …………………………………………….In person  

Opponent’s Advocate………………………………..Adil Alvi 

 

Quorum                                                               Sh Sukhdev Singh       President

                                                                              Dr P N Tiwari                Member                                                                                                   

                                                                              Mrs Harpreet Kaur     Member

Order by Dr P N Tiwari  Member 

Brief Facts of the case                                                                                                 

Complainant was having saving bank account with OP bank and had ATM card, had withdrawn Rs 3000/- from OP ATM vide ATM no. SICWE 265. He stated that soon after his withdrawal of Rs 3000/-, he got one message from OP bank for another withdrawal of Rs 10,000/- which he did not withdraw.  

He immediately called police on 100 no. and next day, he went to OP bank with police. He was asked to give in writing, so he gave complaint to branch manager on 15/07/2015 where he demanded CCTV footage from 8.20 pm to 8.35 pm on 14/08/2015 marked here as CW1/1. Not getting any reply, filed this complaint and claimed Rs 4,80,000/- compensation for harassment and refund of Rs 10,000/- as wrongly deducted with Rs 11,000/- as litigation charges.

Notice was served. OP submitted written statement and denied all the allegations of deficiency in their services.

OP state that as per bank statement of account annexed here marked as CW1/2, transaction was successful and on 14/07/2015, there were two transactions done by complainant for Rs 3000/ and Rs 10,000/- which were successful. He had also checked his balance in account by withdrawing Rs 100/- after doing paytm payment of Rs 50/-on the same date.  Thus, complainant had made all the wrong and false claims.

OP also stated that all the terms and conditions for using cards were known to complainant. He was making all the false claims before this Forum, so complaint be dismissed. OP stated that in case Ravneet Singh Bagga vs KLM Airlines, 2000 SCC, that deficiency of OP had to be proved by the complainant. Hence, complaint be dismissed with cost.  

Complainant and OP filed their evidences on affidavit and were on record. For arguments, notices were served, but none put their appearance for arguments. Hence, file was perused and order was reserved.

We perused the facts and no concrete evidence was submitted by complainant like 100 number call data, details about three transactions were done from which ATM and its place, FIR copy on record. He demanded CCTV footages, though it was not on record, but CCTV footage could not show the transaction amount withdrawn by complainant. OP also not submitted their ATM internal data showing transaction as successful. He had only submitted downloaded online bank accounts sheet.  

By perusing the written statement and evidence of transactions, it showed transactions were successful. The (debit) ATM card was with complainant and had done number of transactions from same ATM on same date without mentioning the time.  

Hence, we are of the opinion that the three transactions done by complainant on the same date were successful. So, complaint has no merit and the same deserve to be dismissed, so dismissed without cost. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules and file be consigned to the record room.

 

Mrs Harpreet Kaur   Member                                                                          (Dr) P N Tiwari  Member                                                     

 

                                        

                                                        Shri Sukhdev Singh President