DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.338 of 2014
DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 04.12.2014
DATE OF ORDER: - 13.06.2017
Smt. Sandhya Angira, aged 57 years wife of Dr. Krishan Kumar Angira, resident of Bagh Kothi, Gali No. 5 Bhiwani.
.……Complainant.
VERSUS
- Manager, Punjab National Bank, near Redcross Society, Chiriya Ghar Road, Bhiwani.
- Manager, IDBI Bank, Circular Road, Bhiwani.
…….. Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE :- Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Mrs. Sudesh, Member
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member
Present:- Shri Om Parmar, Advocate for complainant.
Shri P.K. Punia, Advocate for OP no. 1.
Sh. R.K. Punia, Advocate for OP no. 2.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that the complainant having a joint SB account no. 1182000109101383 with OP no. 1. The complainant has taken the facility of ATM card in her said account from OP no. 1. On 26.09.2014 at 6.16 p.m. the complainant from her ATM card of PNB made transaction for the withdrawal of Rs. 10,000/- from the ATM of OP no. 1 but no amount came out from the ATM, even after waiting 4-5 minutes. The ATM has rejected the transaction. At that time there was balance of Rs. 94,204 in the SB account of the complainant. It is further alleged that on the same day at 6.31 p.m. the complainant from her same ATM card withdrawn a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from the ATM of HDFC Bank, then the complainant came to know that a sum of Rs. 20,000/- has been withdrawn from her account and there is a balance of Rs. 74,204/- From the slip of HDFC Bank ATM, the complainant came to know that Rs. 10,000/- from the transaction of IDBI Bank has been debited, while the said transaction was rejected. The complainant did not receive the said Rs. 10,000/-. The ATM of OP no. 2 has rejected the transaction of complainant. The complainant visited the OPs several times and the husband of the complainant made a complaint to the OP no. 1 on 21.10.2014. The OP no. 2 has failed to supply the CCTV footage of dated 26.09.2014. The husband of the complainant also wrote letter dated 22.11.2014. The OPs did not redress the grievances of the complainant despite repeated requests. The OPs are guilty of deficiency in service and liable to pay Rs. 90,000/- for mental agony and harassment and also the litigation cost to the complainant.
2. Opposite party no. 1 on appearance filed written statement alleging therein that as per interbank reconciliation report, it reveals that the complainant had withdrawn Rs. 10,000/- from ATM of IDBI and subsequently Rs. 10,000/- from ATM of HDFC Bank, Bhiwani and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was debited from the account of the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant came in the branch office of the OP no. 1, the concerned officials explained the situated with documentary proof and the answering respondent also made correspondence with IDBI Bank to resolve the complaint of the complainant. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent no. 1 and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. OP no. 2 on appearance filed separate written statement alleging therein that the transaction which was made by the husband of the complainant was successful with the IDBI Bank ATM. It is submitted that no any excess amount was found in the ATM, when the officer of AGS Transact Technologies Ltd. went to installation of money in the said ATM. It is submitted that the answering respondent made a contract with the AGS Transact Technologies Ltd. regarding the installation and maintenance of cash dispensers in State of Haryana and others states. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent no. 2 and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
4. In order to make out his case, the counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavits Annexure CW1/A and CW2/A and documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-9 alongwith supporting affidavit.
5. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite party no. 1 has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-20 alongwith supporting affidavit and counsel for opposite party no. 2 has tendered into evidence documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-6 alongwith supporting affidavit.
6. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
7. Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the complainant admitted that the disputed ATM withdrawal of Rs. 10,000/-, has been credited in the SB account of the complainant. The counsel for the complainant submitted that the OPs are liable to pay compensation for mental agony and harassment.
8. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1 reiterated the contents of reply. He submitted that the OP no. 1 has credited the amount of Rs. 10,000/-in the SB account of the complainant. An affidavit of Bal Mukand Soparna, Senior Manager of OP no. 1 has already been placed on the file and there is now nothing due to the complainant.
9. Learned counsel for the OP no. 2 reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the transaction made by the complainant from the ATM of OP no. 2 is successful. He submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP no. 2.
10. Admittedly, the amount of Rs. 10,000/- against the claim of the complainant has been credited by the OP no. 1 in the SB account of the complainant on 05.02.2015. It shows that the allegations made by the complainant in the complaint were true that the complainant has not received the amount of Rs. 10,000/- from the ATM of OP no. 2 when she made transaction through her ATM card on 26.09.2014. The contention of OP no. 2 that the transaction was successful is found not to be true and correct. The OP no. 2 did not verify the claim of the complainant regarding non-receipt of 10,000/- from its ATM on 26.09.2011, carefully. The OP no. 2 being the service provider is bound to take proper steps on the complaint of consumer. Taking into account each and every aspect of the case, we partly allow the complaint of the complainant against OP no. 2. The OP no. 2 is directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment to the complainant. The OP no. 2 is directed to pay the said amount by way of demand draft drawn in favour of the complainant and the same be sent on her address given in the complaint within 30 days from the date of passing of this order, otherwise the OP no. 2 shall be liable to pay the interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum on the award amount till the date of payment. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated:13.06.2017. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Parmod Kumar) (Sudesh)
Member. Member.
