Haryana

StateCommission

A/710/2017

SHYAM SUNDER - Complainant(s)

Versus

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK - Opp.Party(s)

PANKAJ MEHTA

04 Oct 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

Date of Institution: 12.06.2017

Date of final hearing: 08.08.2024

Date of pronouncement: 04.10.2024

 

First Appeal No.710 of 2017

 

Shyam Sunder, aged 55 years, S/o Sh. Ram Parkash, R/o H.No. 263, Sector-15, Hisar now R/o Village Lohri Ragho, Tehsil Narnaund, District Hisar.                                                                ....Appellant

Versus

1. Manager, P.N.B. Branch Satroad Khurd, District Hisar.  
2. Manager, I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Branch Bhuvneshwar, Madhya Pradesh.                                                            …..Respondents

CORAM:             Sh. Naresh Katyal, Judicial Member.

                             Sh. S.C. Kaushik, Member.

 

Argued by:-       Mr. Rohit Goswami proxy counsel for Mr. Pankaj Mehtra, counsel for appellant.

                             Mr. Sikander Bakshi, counsel for respondent No.1.

                             Respondent No. 2 already ex-parte.

 

                                                ORDER

NARESH KATYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:   

          Delay of 26 days in filing of this appeal stands condoned for reasons mentioned in application and accompanying affidavit.

2.      Challenge in this appeal No.710 of 2017 has been invited by unsuccessful, but still unfazed complainant, to the legality of order dated 11.04.2017 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-Hisar (In short “District Consumer Commission”) in complaint case No.79 of 2015, vide which his complaint has been dismissed.

3.      Complainant holds Saving Bank Account with No.13000100166544 with ATM facility with respondent No. 1-Punjab National Bank. On 10.06.2014 he received message on his mobile phone about withdrawal of Rs.15,000/- from his account. He made written complaint at Consumer Care Centre bearing No. A000440862 but got no remedy. Consequently, complaint has been filed by him to return him Rs.15,000/- with 18% interest p.a. and to pay him Rs.50,000/- as compensation.

4.      Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared, raised contest. In its written version it is pleaded that complainant has no cause of action, locus standi. It is pleaded that complainant has withdrawn Rs.15,000/- by using ATM ID D114500-J&DC Hisar on 19.04.2014. His account was, somehow, not debited on 19.04.2014. Later on Rs.15,000/- was recovered from complainant on 10.06.2015 with value dated 19.04.2015. It is pleaded that on complaint of complainant; ATM Cell at Head Office inquired the matter and clarified that no transaction was performed on ICICI’s ATM on 10.06.2015. ATM Cell has further informed that transaction dated 19.04.2015 was successful.

5.      OP No.2 did not appear and was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 21.03.2016.

6.  
7.  
8.  

9.      Learned counsel for complainant/appellant has urged that: learned District Consumer Commission has committed gross illegality to non-suit the complainant. It is urged that impugned order dated 11.04.2017 is illegal. Entry dated 19.04.2014 for withdrawal of Rs.15,000/- did not exist and the learned District Consumer Commission has overruled this fact.

10.  
11.  
12.  

13.    Application(s) pending, if any stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

14.    A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.

15.    File be consigned to record room.

Date of pronouncement: 04^th October, 2024.

 

 

 

                                                S.C. Kaushik               Naresh Katyal

Member                        Judicial Member

Addl. Bench                Addl. Bench

D.K.