SRI BIJOY KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Deficiency in service in respect of illegal deduction of service charges on ATM withdrawals and for providing SMS Services are the allegations arrayed against Ops.
2. Complaint in brief reveals that, Complainant is a S/B Account holder under Op- State Bank of India, Pattamundai Branch bearing S/B Account No.- 11304351806. It is alleged that, Op- Bank illegally deducted an amount of Rs. 2092/- which includes illegal debit amount on ATM service charges of Rs. 1492/- and Rs. 600/- for SMS Charges. Complainant protesting the illegal deduction sent a notice through Regd. Post to Op- Bank on dt. 23/06/2017, but no response from side of the Op-Bank on reply of the Notice. Complainant preys this Forum for refund of service charges and compensation of Rs. 1lakh along with cost of litigation.
3. Being noticed, OP- Bank appeared through their Ld. Counsel Mr. R.P.Lenka and filed written statement into the dispute. In the written statement, it is averred that Complainant is a S/B A/C holder under Op-Bank bearing No. 11304351806 and also avails ATM-cum-Debit card facilities. As per the RBI guidelines no service charges are deducted on 4 transactions from Home Branch on use of ATM Card. But in case of other Banks the service charges are automatically deducted and credited to the concerned Bank. On dt. 17.06.2017 to 20.06.2017 Rs. 23/- each have been deducted from the complainants S/B Account and credited to IDBI and Axis Bank as on alleged date of transactions, the Op-Bank is no way related on deduction of the service charges on ATM withdrawal as Home Branch of the Complaint. It is also stated that Rs. 600/- has been deducted by Op-Bank from the complainant’s S/B as SMS charges and enjoyed the service to provided to him for informing absent deposit and withdrawal dates. On receiving the Complaint, SMS services has been stopped in Complainant’s S/B Account. It is further averred that any transaction between Bank and its customer cannot be challenged in any court of law, It is the version of the Op-Bank that, no deficiency in service has been committed by them as alleged by the complainant and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
4. On hearing the parties and on perusal of documents, the admitted facts of the case are that Complainant is a S/B account holder under Op-Bank bearing S/B Account No. 11304351806 and ATM card was provided by the Op-Bank to the Complainant for his Banking transactions. It is also admitted that certain amounts were debited from the complainant’s Account as service charges for using ATM Card and providing SMS facilities.
It is the case of the Complainant that, Op- bank illegally debited an amount of RS. 1492/- on transactions dtd. from 17.6.2017 to 20.6.2017. It is further alleged that Op-Bank has debited Rs. 600/- towards SMS charges, for which Complainant has never applied to avail the service. Op- Bank on its counter submits that, on the alleged date of transactions complainant-Accountholder has used other ATM service counter i.e, IDBI Bank, Axix Bank, for which the other Bank’s has debited the amount as service charges and amount credited to the said Banks as per their Banking Rules and as the other Banks are not impleaded as parties, the Op-Bank can’t be liable for the same. It is the further defence plea of the Op-Bank that, as complainant was using the ATM facilities of OP-Bank and SMS service on ATM-Card transactions the Op-Bank has debited Rs. 600/- towards the SMS service charges and on objection from the Complainant-Account holder. The OP- Bank has stopped providing SMS service facilities to the Complainant.
Considering the submissions, it is clear that on allegation of illegal deduction of Rs. 1492/-, it appears that Complainant has used other Banks ATM counter and the deduction of service charges and crediting the said deduct amount to Banks other than the Home Branch, the Op-Bank is not responsible for the said transactions. Neither the concerned Banks received the ATM service charges are impleaded as party nor complainant substantiates his case that Op-bank by violating the Banking norms has illegally debited the amount. Accordingly, in this point, Op-bank has not committed any deficiency in service. On complainant’s second allegation of debit of Rs. 600/- as SMS charges by Op-Bank, for which complainant has never applied to avail the same, We, feel that no document is produced before this Forum that Complainant-Account holder was opted for the SMS. Service provided by the Op- Bank, when the same is challenged and the onus lies with the OP- Bank to counter the allegation. Hence, it is our unanimous view that debit of Rs. 600/- as SMS charges on complainant’s Account is a unilateral action of the Op-Bank, where the Complainant-Account holder never consented and no prior intimation was given to Account holder for deduction of amount for providing SMS services, if the SMS charges deduction facilities were within the knowledge of the of the Complainant, no evidence is filed in this respect before this Forum, when the allegation is made specifically against the illegal deduction of Rs. 600/- by Op-Bank. Op- Bank in the written statement averred that the relationship between Banker and its customer can’t be challenged in any court of law. In this regard no such provisions or citations are filed to substantiate the version. On the other hand Sec.2(0) of C.P.Act, 1986 includes the banking ‘ system under the definition of ‘service’. So, the plea of the OP- Bank has no legal effect on the case in hand. As Op-Bank has not debited the SMS charges without any ill intention or oblique motive, this Forum don’t impose any compensation or cost as prayed by the Complainant. As the deduction of SMS charges by Op-Bank is not an intentional act, rather the same is a procedural lapses, where the consent of the Account holder is not obtained by the Op-bank prior to providing the SMS service, where the Account holder has to pay certain amount for availing such services. It is noticed from the case record that Complainant’s compensation claim and value of service as per the complaint exceeds Rs. 1 lakh, but complainant has paid only Rs. 100/- in shape of I.P.O. as fees, which shows that Rs. 100/- (Rs. one hundred) only falls deficit towards payment of fees. Accordingly, Complainant is directed to pay additional Rs. 100/- as per the provisions, prior to receipt of this order.
Having observations reflected above, it is directed that, Op-Bank will refund Rs. 600/- with permissible S/B interest calculating from dtd.22/06/2017 to till its realization to the Complainant within one month of receipt of this order, failing which action will be initiated against the Op-Bank as per the provision of C.P.Act,1986.
Complaint is allowed in part on contest, without cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this 21th day of March,2018.
I, agree. I, agree
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
