Haryana

Ambala

CC/51/2017

Ramdiya - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI - Opp.Party(s)

J.P.Singh Chauhan

15 May 2018

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AMBALA

 

                                                          Complaint case no.        : 51 of 2017

                                                          Date of Institution         : 14.02.2017

                                                          Date of decision   : 15.05.2018

 

 

Ramdiya son of Shri Bhagwan Dass, resident of House No.1, Preet Colony, Jandli, Tehsil and District Ambala.

……. Complainant.

Vs.

 

State Bank of India, Main Branch, near Bus Stand, Naraingarh, District Ambala through its Branch Manager.

 

 ….….Opposite Party.

 

Before:        Sh. D.N. Arora, President.

                   Sh. Pushpender Kumar, Member.             

                   Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member.

 

 

Present:       Sh. J.P.Chauhan, counsel for the complainant.

                   Sh. H.S.Garg, counsel for the OP.

 

 

ORDER:

In nutshell, brief facts of the present complaint is that the complainant is having a saving  bank account no.11117215346 CIF No.80904408542 in the State Bank of India, branch Naraingarh and  has also got issued ATM Card for availing facilities of withdrawal of money as and when needed. The complainant on 01.07.2016 in the evening  after reaching his house at village Jandli checked his bank account through ATM as he wanted to know about the credit of his salary for the month of June, 2016 and when he obtained  the mini statement of his account he was surprised to see that  on that date i.e. 01.07.2016 two transactions were made for withdrawal of money through ATM i.e. one of Rs.10000/ and the other of Rs.1900/ which were not made by the complainant. On 3^rd July 2016 the complainant visited the bank branch and updated his passbook and from the entries made in the pass book, it is revealed that both  these entries have been made through Central Bank of India, ATM at Nangloi Delhi, then the complainant cancelled his ATM Card. The complainant also moved a complaint with Police Station Nangloi Delhi for taking action against the culprit  with a copy to the OP/Bank. The OP also assured the complainant that action be taken in the matter, but communication for taking action on the complaint of the complainant from the side of the OP and the Police Station Nangloi Delhi is still awaited. He was very much present in the school for his duty on 01.07.2016 and a certificate of presence of the complainant in the school on 1.07.2016 has also been given to the Bank. The complainant  requested the OP several times to do the needful but the OP postponed  the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly  refused to do the needful. Thereafter the complainant also served a registered/AD notice dated 1.10.2016 upon the OP but all is in vain. Due to this act of the OP, the complainant has suffered great mental pain, harassment agony. Hence the present complaint. 

2.                Upon notice, OP appeared through counsel and tendered written statement and stated that  the transactions by way of an ATM could not be carried out without  the complainant  authorizing  anyone in this behalf and without him disclosing the ATM pin, which is confidential and a must for carrying  out any successful transaction by means of the ATM. Therefore, the money could not be withdrawn without the acquiescence or negligence of the complainant for which the OP has not liability. There is an elaborate  procedure evolved by the OP in terms of directions of the Reserve Bank of India to ensure that without the ATM Card and knowledge of the PIN number, it is not possible for money to be withdrawn by an unauthorized person from an ATM. In all probability, these withdrawals  occurred either because the ATM Card or the PIN number fell in wrong hands or the same was done by an authorized agent of the complainant to him  the pin was disclosed and ATM card handed over or the complainant himself. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Op and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.

3.               To prove his version complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure C X with documents as annexure C 1 to C 7 and close his evidence. On the other hand, Counsel for the OPs tendered affidavits as Annexure R/A with documents as Annexure R 1 & R 2 and closed his evidence.

4.                We have heard learned counsels for both the parties and carefully gone through the case file. In the present case the complainant alleged that complainant has checked his bank account on 01.07.2016 through ATM as he wanted  to know about the credit  of his salary for the month of June, 2016 when he obtained the mini statement  of his account  he was surprised  to see that on that very date  two transactions  have been shown for withdrawal of money through ATM i.e. one of Rs.10000/ and second of Rs.1,900/.  The complainant has moved an application for taking the action against the suspected persons who were present at the time of withdrawal of the amount from the ATM on 11.06.2016 in the Police Station Nagloi, Delhi. Therefore, this complaint is not maintainable as it was the duty of the police authority to trace out the culprits which have been alleged by the complainant in his application moved on 07.07.2016 in this regard DDR  No.76b, dated 07.07.2016 was also lodged by the Police Station Nangloi, Delhi. Inspite of that, the complainant is duty bound to move an application to the  concerned bank to provide the CCTV footage from which this Forum come to this conclusion whether any transactions were made by the complainant or other any person as alleged by the complainant in his complaint which was moved to the Police. On one hand,  the complainant has moved the application to the police for taking criminal action against two persons and on the other hand approached this Forum for alleged deficiency in service on behalf of the bank without moving any application to the bank.

5.                In view of the above facts, we hold that complainant has failed to prove his case without cogent evidence. Accordingly, the complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copy of the order be sent to the parties concerned, free of costs, as per rules. File after due compliance be consigned to record room.  

Announced on : 15.05.2018

 

                    

 

 

 (PUSHPENDER KUMAR)       (ANAMIKA  GUPTA)          (D.N. ARORA)

Member                                 Member                                      President