BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.323 of 2018

Date of Instt. 13.08.2018

Date of Decision: 11.03.2019

Amarjit Singh S/o Surinder Singh 57 Bank Enclave, Phase-II, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Punjab National Bank, Bank Enclave, Phase-II Jalandhar.

2. Punjab National Bank, Head Office, 7 Bhikhaiji Cama Palace, New Delhi.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Jyotsna (Member)

Present: Complainant in Person.

Sh. Manmohan Sharma, Adv Counsel for OPs No.1 & 2.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant opened a saving bank account No.4513000100021027 with Customer ID.GRO002852 in the PNB, Bank Enclave Phase-II Branch on 13.01.2011 and did not take ATM, Cheque Book and Net Banking Service initially. Thereafter, the complainant applied for internet banking service in March 2016 and received passwords (both view and transaction) from the branch on 16.04.2016. On 15.04.2017, the complainant did his first and only successful transaction of Rs.500/-. Thereafter, transaction password blocked, but login/view password was working. He came to know this when he tried to perform another transaction some days later. He contacted customer care on 1800-180-2222 thrice, they opened password reset window for him, but system does not accept any new password from him. So, he contacted customer care again and they directed him to visit concerned branch. He did the same. The bank officials did something on their system, but they unable to solve the problem. So, they advised the complainant to apply for transaction password only and he did the same. He received one time password temporary transaction password in June, 2017. To update/change transaction one has to do login first. When he tried to login, he was surprised that system automatically blocked his login/view password. He visited concerned branch. They did something on their system and advised him to wait for 24 hours. He waited and nothing happened. He visited branch again and this time they applied for fresh view/login and transaction password. The complainant visited concerned branch some days later to inquire about passwords. They directed him to visit IT department in PNB Civil Lines, Jalandhar. At first the officer incharge did not entertain him and said 'No Public Dealing'. The complainant tried again and they called directly to Bank Enclave, Phase-II Branch to know the matter. They advised the complainant to visit concerned branch and apply for ATM to solve this problem fast. The complainant refused the fast option as he does not need ATM and opt for slow procedure and applied for both passwords again in concerned branch. It is noted that the ATM service is optional, not mandatory, and ATM is not essential for internet services. That after waited for some days, the complainant did two complain-cum-request about this in pgportal.gov.in with complaint No.DEABD/E/2017/22328 and DEABD/E/2017/24237. They directed the complain-cum to visit concerned branch and apply for passwords again. He did the same on 05.09.2017. The complainant also made a complaint to the Banking Ombudsman, Chandigarh about the whole situation on 03.10.2017 and complaint of the complainant was registered by the Banking Ombudsman bearing No.201718007002693 on 06.10.2017 and accordingly, the Banking Ombudsman called the IT Department, Jalandhar and sort this matter. At last, they again applied for both passwords on complainant behalf and the complainant signed the application that disposed his complaint on good faith and Banking Ombudsman also disposed the complaint of the complainant and thereafter, the complainant requested the Banking Ombudsman to open his complaint again or register a new complaint as he still not received any positive reply. The complainant wrote three emails to Banking Ombudsman and they replied to none. So, the complainant called the Banking Ombudsman on telephone No.0172-2721011 and Banking Ombudsman said “Your complaint is ON”, concerned branch solve your problem. The complainant accordingly, again called the Banking Ombudsman, but the matter was not solved and accordingly, necessity arose to file the present complaint being reason the act and conduct of the OPs is un-called and deficient in service and thus, the instant complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay sum of Rs.20,000/- for not providing appropriate services after multiple attempts and further OPs be directed to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for causing mental strain and mental agony to the complainant and OPs be also directed to pay cost of litigation of Rs.20,000/-.

2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, both the OPs appeared through its counsel and filed joint written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable against the answering OPs because the complainant himself was unaware about the process of using the internet banking due to which the password and login used to get block again and again which happened due to mistake of the complainant himself, as such, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the answering OPs. Moreover, no amount is charged separately for the net-banking service by the OPs and as such, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further alleged that no cause of action has arisen to the complainant to file the present complaint against the answering OPs because the complainant has already filed the complaint before the Banking Ombudsman, Chandigarh, which is still pending for adjudication, which fact has been admitted by the complainant itself in Para No.8 and 9 of the complaint, as such, the present complaint before this Forum is liable to be dismissed being pre-mature. On merits, the carrying on saving account in the bank of the OP, is not denied rather the other all allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

3. The complainant filed Rejoinder of the written reply and whereby reasserted the entire facts as detailed in the complaint and denied those of the written statement.

4. Further in order to prove their respective claim, both the parties produced on the file respective documents along with the pleadings.

5. We have heard the complainant in person as well as learned counsel for the OPs and also scanned the case file very minutely.

6. Before discussing the main issue in dispute, we like to take the plea of the OPs that the instant complaint is pre-mature being reason the complainant has already filed a complaint before the Banking Ombudsman and the said complaint is pending, which has not been decided. The said plea of the OPs is itself admitted by the complainant in his complaint, in Para No.8 and 9. Admitted facts needs not to be proved, so, accordingly, we have accepted that the complainant has already filed a complaint before the Banking Ombudsman, which is also registered by the Banking Ombudsman, bearing No.201718007002693 on 06.11.2017, regarding that the complainant alleged in complaint in Para No.8 in the last line the said complaint before the Banking Ombudsman has been disposed of and copy of the said order allegedly placed on the file Ex.C-10 and as per that email Ex.C-10 admittedly the complainant got disposed the said complaint being settled and if the matter in dispute has been already settled and disposed of by the Banking Ombudsman in its order Ex.C-10, then the complainant has no right to file the instant complaint before this Forum because the complainant has right to adopt the procedure of one Forum either to Consumer Forum or to the Ombudsman and if matter is disposed of by the Ombudsman and the same is not accepted to the complainant, then the remedy with the complainant is only to file appeal against that order before the Appropriate Authority i.e. Deputy Governor of RBI and as such, we are of the opinion that the instant complaint before this Forum is not maintainable, therefore, the same is dismissed with the liberty to the complainant to file appeal against the order of the Banking Ombudsman before the Appropriate Authority. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

7. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Jyotsna Karnail Singh

11.03.2019 Member President