Haryana

StateCommission

A/535/2016

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK - Complainant(s)

Versus

KUNDAL LAL - Opp.Party(s)

ASHISH RAWAL

17 Oct 2016

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      535 of 2016

Date of Institution:      10.06.2016

Date of Decision :       17.10.2016

 

Punjab National Bank through its Branch Manager, Branch Office Good Year India Limited, 21/4, Mile Stone, NH-2, Matura Road, Ballabgarh-121004, District Faridabad.

                                      Appellant-Opposite Party

Versus

 

Kundan Lal s/o Sh. Lok Chand, Resident of H.No.225/1, Baba Hirday Nath Colony, Mujessar, Faridabad.

                                      Respondent-Complainant

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member   

 

Argued by:          Shri Ashish Rawal, Advocate for appellant.

                             Ms. Deepa Jain, Advocate for respondent.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

 

          Punjab National Bank-Opposite Party, is in appeal against the order dated April 01^st, 2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Faridabad (for short ‘the District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by Kundan Lal-complainant/respondent, was accepted.

2.                Kundan Lal-complainant, filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 averring that he maintained account No.0036010400045632 with Punjab National Bank (PNB)-Opposite Party/appellant. He also availed the facility of Automated Teller Machine (for short ‘ATM’).

3.                On 26^th December, 2013 at about 4.50 P.M., he tried to withdraw Rs.10,000/- by use of ATM. Though he received message of withdrawal of Rs.10,000/-, however actually he did not receive the amount.  The complainant approached the opposite party and also lodged Daily Diary Report (DDR) on 03.01.2014 with Police of Police Station Mujesar, Faridabad but to no avail. Hence, the instant complaint.

4.                The opposite party contested complaint by filing written version. It was stated that the complainant maintained account with the opposite party and withdrew the amount of Rs.10,000/-. As per J.P. log, the transaction was successful. It was prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

5.                After evaluating the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the District Forum vide impugned order allowed complaint and directed the opposite party as under:-

“….Opposite Party is directed to credit the amount of Rs.10000/- in the saving account of the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of debit till realisation of amount and to pay Rs.5500/- on account of mental tension, agony as well as harassment besides Rs.2200/- towards litigation expenses to the complainant within thirty days from the date of receipt of this order.”

6.                While assailing the order of the District Forum, the appellant-opposite party has placed on the record “Switch Transaction Report” (Annexure A-5) showing the transaction to be successful. A perusal of J.P. Log shows that the complainant did withdraw Rs.10,000/- and transaction was successful. The J.P. Log mentions ATM booth, the time of entering the booth, the time of operation and closure of the door. Even the Compact Disc (C.D.) has been placed on the file showing the complainant to have operated the ATM. The complainant does not dispute the entry to booth and operating the machine. However, only denies the disbursing of cash.  As per record placed on the file by the appellant-opposite party, no excess cash was found.

7.                In view of the above, it is held that the amount of Rs.10,000/- was withdrawn by the complainant from the ATM on 26^th December, 2013 and the transaction was successful. The District Forum fell in error in allowing the complaint. Hence, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the complaint is dismissed.

8.                The statutory amount of Rs.9938/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant-opposite party against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 17.10.2016

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

CL