BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Amrik Singh, Earlier R/o # 3233, Sector 71, Mohali, now residing at # 3254, Sector 44-D, Chandigarh.

 …..Complainant

                 V E R S U S

1]  ICICI Bank Ltd., ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai 400051 through its Managing Director

2]  ICICI Bank Ltd., SCO No.9-10-11, Sector 9-D, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.

                      ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                    PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL       MEMBER

         DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Counsel for Complainant.

          Sh.Sandeep Suri, Counsel for OPs.

PER DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER

         Precisely put, the complainant opened an account bearing NO.001301579024 with OP Bank having balance of Rs.3.00 lacs as on 23.3.2011. As averred, the complainant never operated the said account or used its ATM Card, but inspite of that his account was debited through ATM withdrawals at regular intervals leaving a balance of Rs.4451/-. This fact came to his knowledge only on 10.8.2011, when complainant asked the OP-2 to adjust the loan amount from his aforesaid account.  Immediately, the request for blocking ATM Card & Internet Banking as well as providing CCTV Clippings & detailed account statement was made to OP Bank.  It is also averred that the complainant had opted the SMS alert facility on his mobile number, but he did not receive even a single SMS for all withdrawals.

         It is further averred that the OPs only provide account statements, but refused to provide CCTV footage as well as credit the amount in his account, as requested.  It is submitted that the complainant did not receive the SMS alert for the ATM withdrawals inspite of getting the facility activated on his mobile.  Moreover, OPs failed to prove the CCTV footage of the ATMS from where the money has been withdrawn as well as complete details of ATM withdrawals. It is also pleaded that there is every possibility that some of the official/employee of the OPs might have done the said act, causing loss to the complainant, but OPs did not take any action in the matter. A legal notice was sent to the OPs, but to no avail.  Hence, this complaint.

2]       OPs filed reply and admitted the fact of opening of account with it as well as its last balance of Rs.4451/- w.e.f. 30^th July onwards.  It is stated that SMS services are provided by the OP bank as a special facility and the Bank is not responsible for final delivery of the same. That the card had been used for withdrawal of the amount through ATM and as such the account was debited.  It is further averred that the complainant was in physical possession of the ATM Card as well as in the knowledge of its unique password without which, neither could it be used nor any withdrawal could be made.  It is also stated that the video recording cannot be provided as the transactions per the list have taken place at various ATMs, that too, not belonging to the OPs and those banks have not been made a party to the present complaint. Furthermore, the detailed statement of account was provided to the complainant. Moreover, it was for the complainant to report the matter to the police in case, he noticed any fraud committed with him.  Denying any rest of the allegations of the complainant as well as pleading no deficiency in service on their part, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3]      Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

4]      We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

5]       The sole averment of the complainant is that the OPs are deficient in rendering proper services by not sending the SMS, from time to time, inspite of opting for the facility, activated on his mobile about SMS alert for any, withdrawal made through ATM transaction.  The OPs also failed to provide the CCTV footage of ATMs, wherefrom the money has been withdrawn as well as complete details of the ATM transactions.

6]       On the other hand, the OPs contended that the withdrawal of the amount has been made after duly putting in the PIN number, which was uniquely in the knowledge of the complainant only and the card was also in his physical possession.  Moreover, it is the responsibility/duty of the cardholder to ensure not to reveal his PIN Number to anyone and took all precautions to prevent such unauthorized usage.  Furthermore, it was pleaded that the amount has been withdrawn from the account of the complainant through various transaction and from different places.  Therefore, the video recording/footage cannot be provided by the OPs as the alleged illegal withdrawal of amount has taken place at difference places.

7]       After carefully going through the facts & circumstances of the present complaint as well as perusing the documents placed on file by both the parties; in order to clinch the matter in dispute, it has been made out that the withdrawal from the account of the complainant through ATM on different dates, at different places is not disputed.  But the question, which needs to be determine is, as to who has used the ATM Card of the complainant ? 

8]       The complainant vide letter dated 10.8.2011 (Ann.C-1), written to the OP Bank, has mentioned that:-

“…….Some one has misused my ATM card.  I came to your branch to enquire about my loan and was shocked to know that Rs.3,00,000/- have been withdrawn from my account by some unknown person…….”

9]       This document proves that it is an admitted fact that the ATM card of the complainant has been misused by some unknown person.  Moreover, the complainant has failed to give any plausible justification to prove the deficiency on the part of OPs, if actually someone unknown had actually used his ATM Card and made the withdrawals.  It is obvious that the withdrawal from an ATM is possible only if the ATM card is used along with Personal Identification Number (PIN).  The complainant was under legal obligation not to reveal his PIN to anyone and take all precautions to safeguard his ATM Card so that unauthorized withdrawal could not be made.  The OP Bank cannot be held liable for the unauthorized withdrawal made from the account of the complainant because of negligence & carelessness of the complainant. The complainant himself failed to take reasonable care to secure the ATM card as well as its PIN number.

10]      Moreover, it is not physically possible to prove footage of all the alleged unauthorized withdrawal made from the account of the complainant through ATM because the same has been made on different dates and at different places as is clear from Ann.C-2.

11]     Henceforth, judged from any angle, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the Complainant has not been able to establish any case in his favour or prove any deficiency against the OPs. Therefore, we dismiss this complaint on account of having no merit, weight or substance. However, the respective parties shall bear their own costs.

         Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.