In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.202/2011
1) Satish Kumar Bonsar,
S/o. Late Chandan Ram Bonsar,
G.R.S.E. Ltd. Main Security Department,
43/46, Garden Reach Road, Kolkata-24 ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Punjab National Bank,
A.G. Tower, 3rd Floor, 125, Park Street,
Kolkata-16, P.S. Park Street.
2) The Managing Director, Punjab National Bank, IGM and Circle Office,
A.G. Tower, 3rd Floor, 125/1, Park Street, Kolkata-17.
3) The Branch Manager,
Punjab National Bank, Garden Reach Branch, Kolkata-24
4) The Chairman and Managing Director, Punjab National Bank,
7, Bhikhaiji Camac Place, New Delhi-110066.
5) Ramesh Kapoor, Punjab National Bank,
Garden Reach Branch, Kolkata-24 ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member
Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member
Order No. 18 Dated 13/09/2012.
The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Satish Kumar Bonsar against the o.ps. Punjab National Bank and others. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant had a SB A/C with Punjab National Bank having account no.1911000100126817 since 2006 and he was also issued an ATM card for his convenience from the said bank and further case of the complainant is that the said ATM card was kept with his son Sri Sahil Bonsar for his use and convenience at Amritsar and on 31.1.11 complainant was informed by his son that his wallet was stolen at around 14-56 hours and it also comprised of the said ATM car issued by Punjab National Bank in favour of complainant and FIR was lodged with Kambo Police Station of Amritsar. Thereafter complainant rushed to the said bank at Garden Reach Branch and met Branch Manager there and requested them in writing to lock the said ATM card and complainant was further told by o.p. no.3 there are two ATM cards for the said account and complainant was asked as to which ATM card should be locked and second ATM card was not within the knowledge of complainant and complainant asked bank authority to lock only ATM card that was issued in favour of complainant and then again on 1.2.11 complainant had been to Garden Reach Branch to know about the second ATM card and he was told that the second card was not yet issued to him and bank officer Sri Ramesh Kapoor locked the said second ATM card at the request of complainant and complainant applied for a new ATM card for the said account and on 2.7.11 complainant again went to Garden Reach Branch to transfer Rs.30,000/- from the said account to the account in Amritsar wherein he and his wife are joint holder. More precisely despite request by complainant in writing the lost ATM card was not locked and a sum of Rs.38,780/- was withdrawn from his account after making request in writing to lock the ATM card by o.ps. Hence the case was filed by complainant for redressal.
O.ps had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the instant case has got no merit and is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:-
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. It is seen from the record that complainant had an account with o.ps’. bank at Garden Reach Branch with an ATM card and the said card was lying with the son of complainant and which was subsequently lost and FIR was lodged and complainant after having information by writing letter dt.31.1.11 requested o.p. no.3 to lock the said ATM card, but despite the said request a sum of Rs.38,780/- was withdrawn from his SB A/C even after request of locking by complainant and this action on the part of o.p. no.3 amounts to gross negligency for which complainant should not suffer. It is bank authority who is responsible for such loss of money of complainant.
In view of above findings we are of the views that o.ps. had sufficient deficiency being service provider to their consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the petition of complaint is allowed on contest against all the o.ps. with cost. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to credit a sum of Rs.38,780/- (Rupees thirty eight thousand seven hundred eighty) only in the said SB A/C of complainant together with an interest @ 9% p.a. from 31.1.11 till the date of credit in the said SB A/C of complainant and are further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for his harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
