Delhi

New Delhi

CC/490/2013

Devi Ram Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. GM Canara Bank - Opp.Party(s)

02 Aug 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTRICT NEW DELHI,  M-BLOCK, 1ST FLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE. NEW DELHI-1100001.

 

C.C.No.490/2013

 

 

Devi Ram Sharma,

S/o Sh. Rewti Prasad,

R/o 13th Floor, Palika Kendra,

NDMC Building,

New Delhi-110001.

Vs.

 

….Complainant

 

  1. The General Manager,

Canara Bank,

Connaught Circus Branch,

New Delhi.

 

  1. The Senior Manager,

State Bank of Patiala,

Palwal Branch, Palwal (ATM Machine),
Haryana.

 

Opposite Parties

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant is having an account bearing No.0143101013394 with OP-1 along with ATM facilities. On 7.09.2012, the complainant went to OP-2’s ATM Machine, Palwal to withdraw the money, he swiped his ATM card and withdrew a sum of Rs.10,000/-. Again he swiped the card  but this time, cash was not dispensed.  The complainant cancelled the transaction and he waited for ten minutes but no amount was disbursed from the ATM machine.  Thereafter, complainant left the ATM site. On the next day, the complainant went to another ATM and withdrew Rs.5,000/-.   The complainant went to OP-1 bank for statement of account, than he came to know that OP-1 has debited a sum of Rs.20,000/- from his aforesaid account.  The complainant contacted to General Manager of OP-1 for his grievance but he did not give any response.  The complainant made a lot of complaints with the OP-1 but nothing has been done by the OP-1 to resolve the issue therefore, complainant approached this Forum for redressal of his grievance.

2.     Complaint has been contested by OP-1.  OP-1 denied any deficiency in service on their part. It is stated by the OP-1 that there is no liability on the OP-1 as the amount allegedly  not having been received  by the complainant was actually paid by OP-2 ‘s ATM for which the OP-1 cannot be held liable. It is submitted that the complainant has received a cash sum of Rs.10,000/- vide transaction ID No.5158 in the second time.  It is stated that the complainant has not raised any request for retrieval of CCTV footage of the concerned ATM in his first complaint dt. 18.10.12, as he did not want that the truth to be revealed.  It is further stated that as per the banking practices, all or any debit or credit transactions made in a particular account, an sms is sent on the registered mobile of the bank account holder.  Inspite of the receipt of the sms of both the transactions vide transaction IDs 5156 and 5158, the complainant did not raise a complaint with the bank immediately.  It is further submitted that the complainant or his ATM card holder has taken the cash two times, therefore, he is not entitled for any relief.

3.     OP-2 has stated in its reply that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the alleged cause of action i.e withdrwal of the amount from ATM took place at Palwal.  As per the ATM transaction, the complainant used his ATM card twice and both the time the transactions were successful and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.

4.     Both the parties have filed their evidences by way of affidavit

5.     We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the record.

6.     It is argued by the OP that  on 7.09.2012, at the first instance, the complainant had withdrawn a sum of Rs.10,000/- vide ATM Card No.5497590143001500 from ATM machine, at 13.18.11 and the second transaction/withdrawal was carried out at 13.20.53 for a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the same ATM. The JP Log and reconciliation statement for each and every transaction  shows the status of “ATM TALLIED”. In support of his contention he has drawn our attention toward JP Log report, reconciliation statement and switch transaction report.  Perusal of the same reveals that on 7.9.2012 the complainant has used his ATM Card twice for the first time he withdrew Rs.10,000/- and on 2nd occasion Rs.10,000/-.  The report placed by the OP shows that the transactions were successful one. 

7.     It is a general practice that an ATM Card can only be used if the customer inputs his personal four digit identification number which is selected by the customer and not by the Bank. In the interest of security, the customer is advised to retain this PIN in his memory so that no one else is privy to this information. The reverse of the ATM has a magnetic strip and white strip for signature of the cardholder. The Magnetic strip contains the cardholder’s details. This card can be used to gain entry into ATM enclosure by swiping it in the access lodge. In other words, unless a person is in possession of the relevant ATM Card and knows, the four digit PIN, the ATM Card cannot be used and operated. In the present case, the complainant has not alleged that the ATM card was misplaced, infact, the same is in his possession and as per the procedure without PIN number,  no one can access the ATM card or can use it hence, in the present case, we are of the opinion that in the light the copies of JP Log report, reconciliation statement and switch transaction report reveals that on 7.9.2012 the complainant has used his ATM Card twice for the first time he withdrew Rs.10,000/- and on 2nd occasion Rs.10,000/- and both transaction were successful.

  8.   In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the there is no deficiency in services on the part of OPs. Therefore, we find no merits in the present complaint same is hereby dismissed.     

 

Copy of the order may be forwarded to the parties to the case free of cost as statutorily required.  The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to Record Room.

 

Announced in open Forum on 02/08/2019

 

 

 

(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

          PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                  (H M VYAS)

       MEMBER                                                                 MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.