Delhi

West Delhi

CC/10/809

KAILASH KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI - Opp.Party(s)

11 Sep 2018

ORDER

 

 

                    CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

                                           GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151, Community Centre, C-Block, Janak  Puri, New Delhi – 110058

                                                                                                 Date of institution: 22.11.2010

Complaint Case. No.809/10                                                 Date of order:   11.09.2018

IN  MATTER OF

 

Kailash Kumar Prajapati , S/o  Sh. Raja Ram,  R/o F-17 , Rajdhani Park F Block, Village Munkda, Nangoli, Delhi-110041.                                                             Complainant

 

VERSUS

                                                                                                                       

SBI  Branch -34, Raja Garden,  New Delhi-110015.

                                                                                                                              Opposite party                                                           

                                    ORDER

PUNEET LAMBA, MEMBER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.Ps u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant  was having a saving Account No.30768317820 with SBI i.e. OP and having the ATM card of the same.  It is alleged that on 23.08.2010 when the complainant saw the bank statement he was shocked to know that the balance reflected is zero. Whereas the bank statement which is of 01.08.2010 to 20.08.2010 reflected the balance as Rs.48,201/-. The complainant immediately contacted the manager of the bank and told about his grievance but the bank manager told the complainant that the statement is generated from the computer and whatever is reflected in computer copy of the same is given to the complainant and he further advised the complainant, to approach police station of his area. The complainant asserted that he has withdrawn Rs. 500/- thrice on 03.08.2010, 04.08.2010 and 04.08.2010 respectively and no other amount was withdrawn by him. The amount is withdrawn by two companies namely Avenue India pvt. Ltd. Mumbais@Bill Desk, Delhi/Mumbai which was informed by the manager of Op. The complainant has no transaction ever with the companies. The complainant alleged that since 20.08.2017 he is approaching  the Op and till now has spent Rs. 20,000/- on pursuing the complaint with OP.  Hence the present complaint for direction to the op to refund Rs. 48,201/-.       

          Consequent upon the receipt of complaint Notice was issued to the OP, who has filed its reply. The OP vehemently denied the allegations that the complainant approached branch manager and made any written or oral complaint and approached directly to the higher authority of the bank. The  OP has pleaded that amount can be withdrawn only by using  ATM card and  confidential pin number known only to the said customer.  The OP asserted that the amount has been withdrawn as shown in the account statement. The OP asserted that the complaint is false and frivolous and there is no negligence and deficiency in service on part of OP and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint. The OP

                   When the parties were asked to lead evidence the complainant filed affidavit of evidence testifying facts of complaint on oath. He also relied on letter dated 23.08.2010, 14.09.2010, and statement of account.  The OP tendered affidavit of Shri Anil Kumar Manager of Branch Raja Garden OP reiterating the facts of reply and deposed that the complainant has withdrawn the amount and there is no negligence and deficiency of service   on part of OP and again prayed for dismissal of the complaint. It also relied on statement of account of complainant from 01.08.2010 to 20.08.2010.        

                       We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties as well as written submission.  We have also heard both the parties at length.  It is admitted that the ATM/ Debit Card remains in the custody of the users.  The PIN code is also only known to the users.  No transaction can be carried out by the user without ATM/ Debit Card along with PIN to which he/she is only privy to it.  In the present case also the ATM card was in possession of the complainant and the PIN number was only in his knowledge without which he could not have operated the ATM. The complainant admitted before the Forum that during 28.06.2010 to 16.08.2010 he was out of Delhi and the transaction in dispute as alleged by the complainant has also taken place outside Delhi during the same time period. In such circumstances we have no hesitation in accepting the contention of the O.P that the said transaction of Rs.48,201/-  was successful.  In this view of the matter, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency or negligence in services on the part of the O.P.  Accordingly, the complaint fails and is dismissed.        

Order pronounced on :- 11.09.2018

• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be  consigned to record.

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                                                                              (K.S. MOHI)                       MEMBER                                                                                                              PRESIDENT