Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 460.
Instituted on : 11.12.2014.
Decided on : 12.04.2016.
Mr. Ved Parkash Sain Village Garhi Bohar, P.O.Asthal Bohar, Rohtak, Haryana-124021.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
The Manager Punjab National Bank Branch Asthal Bohar-124021.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT.
MS. KOMAL KHANNA, MEMBER.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh.M.L.Dhingra, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR JAKHAR, PRESIDENT :
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant with the averments that he is having an A/c No.7602000100003252 with the opposite party. It is averred that on 27.06.2014 he used the ATM card to withdraw a sum of Rs.10000/- and realized that the ATM was not working properly and there was some error due to which the money was not withdrawn. It is averred that he again tried to withdraw Rs.5000/- but this transaction also failed but later on he received an SMS that his transaction was successful and amount of Rs.15000/- was debited from his account. It is averred that he immediately filed a complaint with the opposite party and discussed his problem with them but despite his repeated requests and visits his problem was not resolved by the opposite party but lateron after repeated and persistent requests, the amount of Rs.150000/- was credited back to his account on October 21, 2014 but the compensation of Rs.20000/- has not yet been refunded by the opposite party. It is averred that the act of opposite party have caused a great deal of mental harassment and monetary expenditure to the complainant and the complainant had wasted almost 4 months in getting his grievance resolved. As such it is prayed that the opposite party may kindly be directed to pay a sum of Rs.20000/- as compensation on account of mental agony, harassment etc. and Rs.1000/- towards cost of petition to the complainant.
2. On notice opposite party appeared and filed its written reply submitting therein that it is denied that the ATM was not working properly or there was some error due to which money was not withdrawn. Infact, on the said date, ATM was properly working and the complainant has actually withdrawn the amount of Rs.15000/- on that date and there was no complaint from him. It is denied that the amount of Rs.15000/- was credited back to his account. Complainant is not entitled to any compensation from the opposite parties. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied. It is averred that there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party and dismissal of the complaint has been sought.
3. Both the parties led evidence in support of their case.
4. Complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C11 and has closed his evidence. On the other hand ld. Counsel for the opposite party tendered affidavit Ex.DW1/A, documents Ex.D1 to Ex.D7 and has closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the complainant as well as ld. Counsel for the opposite party and have gone through the material aspects of the case carefully.
6. In the present case it is not disputed that as per copy of pass-book Ex.C1, an amount of Rs.15000/- has been shown to be withdrawn on 27.06.2014 through ATM. It is also not disputed that as per complaints Ex.C2 to Ex.C4, the alleged amount was deducted from his account but the complainant had not received the same. As per reply Ex.C5, the opposite party has informed that the said transaction was found successful and No excess cash found and the claim was rejected by the opposite party. The contention of the complainant is that the amount of Rs.15000/- has been wrongly debited from the account of the complainant as the same was not received by the complainant and lateron the opposite party has credited the alleged amount in the account of complainant after great persuasion and efforts and the complainant is entitled for the compensation. On the other hand, opposite party vide its reply and affidavit has submitted that the transaction was successful and the complainant has actually withdrawn the alleged amount. It is also observed that as per the letter Ex.D6 it is submitted by the opposite party that : “On the first instance transaction was found successful in system, so the claim was rejected and reply was given to customer. After insisting of customer, cctv footage was demanded, but due to technical reasons cctv footage was not available. For maintaining the relationship with customer Bank has given benefit of doubt and amount was credited in his account. Since disputed amount is credited in his account, further compensation is not legitimate”.
7. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that as per transaction sheet Ex.D1 the amount of Rs.15000/- has been shown to be withdrawn through TXN No.1387 from the account of complainant. As per the reply Ex.D6 though the transaction was successful but the complainant demanded cctv footage which was not available, so the opposite party for maintaining the relationship with customer had given benefit of doubt and had credited the amount of Rs.15000/- in his account which is not denied by the complainant. As the amount has already been refunded by the opposite party before filing the present complaint. So there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party. As such the present complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs.
9. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
12.04.2016.
................................................
Joginder Kumar Jakhar, President
..........................................
Komal Khanna, Member.
………………………………..
Ved Pal, Member
