Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 548.
Instituted on : 03.12.2015.
Decided on : 08.03.2016.
Poonam wife of Sh. Sunil Kumar through Power Attorney Holder Sh. Sunil Kumar son of Sh. Laxmi Narain resident of Chhotu Ram Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sonepat Road, Rohtak through its Manager, Rohtak.
- Punjab National Bank, TBD HO, Level 9, Antriksha Bhawan 22, K.G.Marg, New Delhi-110001 through its Regional Manager/Incharge.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT.
MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Devender Verma, Advocate for the complainant.
Opposite parties exparte.
ORDER
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT :
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that she is having an A/c No.07412191034147 with opposite party no.1. It is averred that on 15.10.2015 complainant wanted to withdraw an amount of Rs.10000/- from his account by way of ATM Machine of opposite party no.2. It is averred that complainant tried to withdraw the above said amount twice but both the times the transaction was not successful but it was told by the concerned official of the bank that an amount of Rs.20000/- has been shown to be withdrawn form the account of complainant on 15.10.2015 though ATM. It is averred that the complainant has not withdrawn the alleged amount from the account as such the alleged entries of withdrawal of Rs.20000/- were wrong and illegal. It is averred that complainant made a complaint on 17.10.2015 but her request was rejected. The complainant again made a request dated 20.11.2015 for getting the footage of CCTV Camera but in vain. Complainant requested the opposite parties to credit the amount of Rs.20000/- in her account but to no effect. As such it is averred that opposite parties may kindly be directed to make necessary correction and to delete the entry of withdrawal of Rs.20000/- and to credit the amount of Rs.20000/- in his account alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses.
2. On notice opposite parties did not appear despite the fact that notice sent to opposite party no.1 received back with the report of refusal and notice to opposite party no.2 was issued through registered post. As such opposite parties were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.01.2016 of this Forum.
3. Both the parties led evidence in support of their case.
4. Sh. Sunil Kumar power of attorney holder of the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed his evidence.
5. We have heard ld. Counsel for the complainant and have gone through the material aspects of the case carefully.
6. In the present case it is not disputed that complainant had tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.10000/- twice from the ATM of opposite party no.2 from her account vide TXN No.5142 and 5143. The contention of the complainant is that the alleged amount was not dispensed but the amount of Rs.20000/- was debited from her account. Complainant requested the opposite parties to correct the transaction and to credit the amount of Rs.20000/- in her account but her claim was rejected. To prove her case complainant has placed on record documents Ex.C1 and Ex.C2 whereby the complaint has been rejected. Ex.C3 is the receipt of Rs.572/- deposited for arbitration fee through NPCI. Ex.C4 is the copy of mail regarding rejection of complaint. As per certificate Ex.C7 issued by the opposite party no.2 it is submitted that : “As per JP Log the transaction no.5142 dated 15.10.2015 is a successful transaction and No excess cash found on dated 15.10.2015 at ATM ID 12091600. As per document Ex.C8 the transaction no.5142 and 5143 has been shown as successful. But as per statement of account Ex.C9 issued by opposite party no.1, an amount of Rs.10000/- has been credited on 14.01.2016 by way of arbitration and an amount of Rs.8100/- on account of compensation and Rs.572/- on account of arbitration fee reversal have been credited in the account of complainant on 14.01.2016.
7. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that the complainant had complained about the two transactions of Rs.10000/- each and on the complaint of the complainant, an amount of Rs.10000/- alongwith compensation and arbitration fee reversal have been credited in the account of complainant on account of txn no.5142. Now the complainant has demanded the amount of Rs.10000/- alongwith compensation for another transaction of 5143. In this regard it is observed that complainant had complained for both the disputed transactions of Rs.1000/- each and the amount which was refundable to the complainant has been credited in his account by the opposite party alongwith compensation. Regarding the another transaction there is nothing on record that the same was not successful. As such the same was not credited in the account of the complainant.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is observed that there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such the present complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
10. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
08.03.2016.
................................................
Joginder Kumar Jakhar, President
..........................................
Komal Khanna, Member.
………………………………..
Ved Pal, Member
