DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA

CC.No.65 of 05-03-2018

Decided on 12-06-2019

Ajay Jindal S/o Sardari Lal Jindal R/o H.No.21012, St. No.2, Power House Road, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1.Zonal Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda. (Deleted)

2.The Manager, State Bank of India, Branch SSC, Bathinda.

3.Octave Show Room, Mall Road, Bathinda

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM

Sh.M.P Singh Pahwa, President.

Mrs.Manisha, Member.

Present:-

For the complainant: Sh.Sarabjit Singh, Advocate.

Opposite party No.1: Deleted.

For opposite party No.2: Sh.Naveen Goyal, Advocate.

Opposite party No.3: Ex-parte.

ORDER

M.P Singh Pahwa, President

1. The complainant Ajay Jindal (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against opposite parties Zonal Manager and Others (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).

2. Briefly, the case of the complainant is that he is holder of account bearing No.65080350978 of opposite party bank. He is issued the debit card.

3. It is alleged that on 9.9.2017, the complainant went to Octave Showroom, Mall Road, Bathinda and made the shopping of Rs.1500/-. The owner of this showroom swiped the card of the complainant three times in order to transfer amount, but amount was not transferred in his account. Under compelled circumstances, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1500/- from his pocket to the showroom. Opposite party Nos.1 and 2 deducted an amount of Rs.4500/- from the account of complainant, but did not transfer the same to the account of showroom. When this fact came to the notice of the complainant, he visited opposite party Nos.1 and 2 and requested them to return amount, but they did not pay any attention.

4. It is further alleged that opposite parties without any cause and reason deducted amount from the account of the complainant, which is totally illegal. The complainant many times requested opposite parties to return amount, but they did not listen to him. He also got issued notice to opposite party Nos.1 and 2, but they did not give him any reply or refund the money.

5. It is also alleged that due to act and conduct of opposite parties, the complainant has suffered from great mental tension, agony, botheration harassment and also financial loss. For these sufferings, he has claimed damages to the tune of Rs.20,000/-; Rs.4500/- deducted by opposite parties and cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.11,000/-. Hence, this complaint.

6. In view of statement suffered by learned counsel for complainant, name of opposite party No.1 was deleted from the array of opposite parties.

7. Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.3. As such, ex-parte proceedings were taken against it.

8. Opposite party No.2 appeared through its counsel and contested the complaint by filing written version. In the written version, opposite party No.2 has raised the legal objections that this complaint is not maintainable. The complainant has no locus-standi or cause-of-action to file the complaint against opposite party No.2. He has not come to this Forum with clean hands and he has intentionally suppressed the true and material facts from this Forum. This complaint has been filed just to unnecessarily harass opposite party No.2. It is false, frivolous and vexatious to the knowledge of the complainant and lastly,that the complainant is estopped from filing the complaint by his own act, conduct and acquiescence.

9. On merits, it is revealed that the complainant lodged the complaint with opposite parties regarding amount of Rs.1500/- each for three times on 9.9.2017. Accordingly, opposite party No.2 referred the complaint to CMS on 29.9.2017. The head office of opposite party No.2 advised opposite party No.2 to obtain the slips from the complainant vide which he made transactions. Accordingly, opposite party No.2 requested the complainant to submit the slips, but he failed to submit the slips. However, opposite party No.2 credited the account of the complainant with Rs.4500/- i.e. Rs.3000/- on 29.9.2017 and Rs.1500/- on 31.1.2018. As such, opposite party No.2 credited total sum of Rs.4500/- in the account of the complainant, but he failed to submit the slips. Opposite party No.2 reserves its right to recover the same from the complainant in case of failure to submit the slips. After controverting all other averments of the complainant, opposite party No.2 has prayed for dismissal of complaint.

10. Parties were asked to produce the evidence.

11. In support of his claim, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 13.6.2018, (Ex.C1); photocopy of letter, (Ex.C2); photocopy of account statement, (Ex.C3); photocopy of e-mail, (Ex.C4); photocopy of legal notice, (Ex.C5); photocopies of postal receipts, (Ex.C6 and Ex.C7) and closed the evidence.

12. To rebut the claim of the complainant, opposite party No.2 has tendered into evidence account statement, (Ex.OP2/1) and closed the evidence.

13. We have heard learned counsel for parties and gone through the file carefully.

14. Learned counsel for complainant has reiterated his averments as taken in the complaint and detailed above. It is further submitted by learned counsel for complainant that although, after filing of this complaint, opposite party No.2 has credited amount of Rs.4500/- in his account, but this fact rather proves deficiency in services on its part. The complainant has already suffered harassment and botheration. He was forced to file the complaint. Opposite party No.2 cannot escape from its liability only by making payment only after filing of complaint.

15. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 has submitted that the complaint is result of connivance between complainant and opposite party No.3. As per complainant, he has purchased article from opposite party No.3 and opposite party No.3 swiped the debit card. Point for determination was whether amount in question has been credited to the account of opposite party No.3 or not and only then the complainant was to allege deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. He has not got produced any record from opposite party No.3. Of-course, he has placed on record copy of legal notice, (Ex.C5), but it was issued only to opposite party Nos.1 and 2. This fact further shows that the complaint is in connivance between complainant and opposite party No.3. The complainant has claimed damages of Rs.20,000/-, but only from opposite party No.2. The deficiency in service is also alleged on the part of opposite party No.3. Opposite party No.2 has also credited amount in the account of the complainant despite the fact that he has failed to produce any transaction slips.

16. We have given careful consideration to these rival submissions.

17. The complainant has claimed that he purchased article worth Rs.1500/- from opposite party No.3 (Octave). Of-course, no invoice is produced on record. The complainant has tried to prove this fact from his account statement, (Ex.C3). As per this account statement, a sum of Rs.1500/- each vide three different entries were debited from the account of the complainant in favour of Octave, Bathinda. This amount is allegedly not credited to their account, but there is no evidence to prove this fact. The complainant has also not produced transaction slips. Still opposite party No.2 has already refunded amount of Rs.4500/- to the complainant. This fact stand proved from account statement, (Ex.OP2/1).

18. As main point was whether amount debited from the account of the complainant has been credited to the account of opposite party No.3 or not, but the complainant has failed to establish this fact. As such, no deficiency in services can be attributed on the part of opposite party No.2.

19. Now, question is for case of the complainant against opposite party No.3. He has pleaded that he has paid amount to opposite party No.3 in cash, but no evidence is brought on record. No receipt to prove payment of Rs.1500/- to the account of Octave, Bathinda is brought on record. Copy of legal notice, (Ex.C5) shows that the complainant has attributed negligence on the part of opposite party Nos.1 and 2 and claimed compensation from opposite party Nos.1 and 2. In these circumstances, no relief against opposite party No.3 can be granted.

20. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is hereby dismissed without any order as to cost.

21. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

22. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record.

    Announced:-

    12-06-2019

    (M.P Singh Pahwa)

    President

     

     

    (Manisha)

    Member