DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD Dated this the 27th Day of February 2012 Present : Smt.Seena H, President : Smt. Preetha.G. Nair, Member : Smt. Bhanumathi.A.K, Member Date of filing: 12/08/2011 (C.C.No.134/2011) V.Sunija, W/o.Joshi T.G.T.Hindi Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayam, Mayannur (PO), Thrissur - Complainant (By Adv.A.K.Joseph) V/s 1.Sony Abraham Kurian, Assistant Manager, Federal bank, Nenmara – 678 508 (By Adv.T.Giri) 2.Manager, Federal Bank Ltd., Nenmara Branch, Main Road, Nenmara – 678 508 (By Adv.T.Giri) 3.Manager, State Bank of India, Ottapalam Branch, Opp.Bus stand, Ottapalam – 679 101 - Opposite parties (By Adv.P.Jayan) O R D E R By Smt.BHANUMATHI.A.K. MEMBER Complaint in brief: In this matter complainant is a account holder of State Bank of India, Ottapalam branch vide account number 10641332591 and an ATM card also issued in her name, vide number 6220180025700078125. 1st opposite party is the Assistant Manager of Federal Bank, Nenmara, who is in whole control of ATM on 15/10/10. On 15/10/10 at 13.04 hrs the complainant tried to withdraw Rs.10,000/- from the ATM counter of Federal Bank, Nenmara branch. In the first attempt itself transaction is successful and received Rs.10,000/- as per TxN No.1120. In the same TxN 1120 slip itself balance enquiry TxN No.1121 slip also included. When the withdrawal slip and balance enquiry slip get together, the complainant checked the balance and received TxN No.1120 slip. At 13.07 hrs the complainant tried to withdraw Rs.10,000/-. At that time received TxN 1123 and TxN No.1124 slips together in one slip. It is shown that Rs.10,000/- had withdrawn. But complainant has not received the amount of Rs.10,000/-. So that again the complainant tried to withdraw money. But TxN No.1125 slip received stating “Transaction Declined”. In this slip the name of the bank or place has not mentioned. Immediately after these incidents the complainant informed the same to the 1st opposite party. But 1st opposite party did not take any step to enquire the matter and also behaved irresponsible manner. Complainant complained in her bank and Banking Ombudsman. After getting the statements from the opposite parties Banking Ombudsman has closed the issue stating “we are not able to further intervene in the matter” with liberty to approach any other Forum for redressal. Above said acts of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service on their part and complainant praying an order directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- which is lost through the opposite parties ATM counter alongwith Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony and cost. Opposite parties entered appearance and filed version with the following : 1st and 2nd opposite parties contented that the complainant has used ATM of opposite parties for several transactions on the same time continuously and as per ATM log all the transactions are successful except slip No.1125 and there was no difference in ATM cash. There is provision in the ATM to do a second transaction after completion of first transaction without taking card outside and if a customer has used that provision details of the subsequent transactions will also get generated in a single slip. In this case the complainant has used that provision for transaction of slip 1120 & 1121 and 1123 and 1124. The slip produced by the complainant show that she has got doubt for her own balance in S.B.Account, so she has withdrawn the amount as per slip No.1120 and requested for balance enquiry as per slip 1121 without taking the card. So both transactions are generated on the same slip. It is not correct to say that she has not received any amount as per slip No.1124. If that being so there would have been excess in cash in the ATM after the said transactions. It is not correct to say that the complainant has brought the complaint before the branch and bank has not enquired into the matter. If she had approached the bank branch would have give sufficient explanation. The complainant has filed petition before Banking Ombudsman against SBI, Ottapalam and it was rejected. There is no deficiency of service on the part of 1st and 2nd opposite parties. 3rd opposite party contended that the complainant has attempted three ATM withdrawals of Rs.10,000/- in ATM of Federal Bank on 15/10/10 at 1.04 pm, 1.06pm and 1.07 pm. All these three transactions were successful and accordingly the complainant’s accounts has been debited from the account of the complainant to ATM of Federal Bank. Moreover this matter was adjudicated before the Banking Ombudsman and was dismissed by verifying all the details. There is no deficiency of service on the part of 3rd opposite party. No specific prayer is made in the complaint with respect 3rd opposite party and complaint may be dismissed. Complainant and opposite parties field their respective affidavits. Ext.A1 – A6 marked on the side of the complainant. Ext.B1 – B4 marked on the side of opposite parties. Heard the matter. Issues to be considered are 1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties ? 2. If so, what is the relief and cost ? Issues No.1 & 2 Complainant is an account holder in SBI Ottapalam branch. The account no. of the complainant is MOD 10641332591. SBI had issued ATM card bearing No.6220180025700078725. On 15/10/10 at 13.04 hrs the complainant had went to the ATM of the Federal Bank, Nenmara Branch and taken an amount of Rs.10,000/- by receipt TxN No.1120. Alongwith the TxN No.1120 TxN No.1121 slip also received stating balance enquiry. Since complainant received both receipts in one slip complainant made a balance enquiry and received slip bearing TxN No.1122. In the complaint it is stated as TxN No.1120. But it seems to be incorrect. Subsequently at 13.07 hrs made withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- and complainant received TxN No.1123 slip. Along with TxN No.1123 slip Complainant got TxN No.1124 slip also stating withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- But the amount is not received to this complainant. So the complainant allege deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and opposite parties are liable to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.50,000/- as compensation along with cost to the complainant. The first contention of the 1st and 2nd opposite party is that the complainant is not a consumer of their bank. Complainant is an account holder of 3rd opposite party SBI and 1st and 2nd opposite parties are not received any amount from the complainant for providing any service to her. Now the banks are functioning under the core banking system. If a customer can use ATM branch of another bank, it means those banks are functioning under the core banking system. The complainant has enjoyed the ATM facility of 1st and 2nd opposite party bank. Thus the complainant is a customer of all opposite parties. So the first issue is solved in favour of the complainant. The 3rd opposite party admits that the complainant is an account holder of the bank and issued a ATM card. The contentions of the complainant are supported by the documentary evidence from Ext.A1 – A6. The only point decided to be is whether the complainant had received the amount of Rs.10,000/- as per the TxN No.1124 slip. According to SBI, the 3rd opposite party, the complainant has attempted three ATM withdrawals of Rs.10,000/- in ATM of Federal Bank on 15/10/10 at 1.04 pm, 1.06pm and 1.07 pm. All the three transactions are successful and the amount have been debited from the complainant’s account to ATM of Federal Bank. This fact is evident from Ext.B3 document. According to 1st and 2nd opposite party there is a provision in the ATM to do a second transaction after completion of first transaction without taking the card out side and if a customer has used that provision details of the subsequent transaction will also get generated in a single slip. If the complainant has not received the amount as per slip No.1124 there would have been excess cash in the ATM after the said transactions. Another contention of the 1st and 2nd opposite parties is that the Banking Ombudsman has rejected the case filed by the complainant after perusing the documents submitted by the opposite parties. 1st and 2nd opposite parties produced Ext.B2 document which shows only the list of documents submitted before Banking Ombudsman. No document is produced infront of the Forum to show that the amount as per slip No.1124 was received by the complainant. In Ext.B2 document it is stated that CCTV is not installed in the said ATM. If CCTV is installed the manager can very well check that whether the complainant has received the amount or not. Even though the Banking Ombudsman rejected the complaint filed by the complainant, she is at liberty to approach any other Forum for redressal. But the 1st and 2nd opposite party did not produce any documents to support their contentions. Ext.B3 document which is clearly shows that the amount has been debited from the complainant’s account to ATM of Federal Bank. So we cannot attribute any deficiency in service on the part of 3rd opposite party. And there is no specific prayer in the complaint against 3rd opposite party. From the above discussions we are of the view that there is deficiency of service on the part of 1st and 2nd opposite party. In the result complaint allowed. 1st and 2nd opposite parties jointly and severally directed to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) along with Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) as compensation alongwith Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as cost of the proceedings. 3rd opposite party is exonerated from the liabilities. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the whole amount shall carry 9% interest per annum from the date of order till realization. Pronounced in the open court on this the 27th day of February 2012 Sd/- Seena.H President Sd/- Preetha G Nair Member Sd/- Bhanumathi.A.K. Member APPENDIX Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant 1.Ext. A1 – Photocopy of ATM Slip of TxN No.1120,1121 dtd.15/10/10 2. Ext. A2 – Photocopy of ATM Slip of TxN No.1122 dtd.15/10/10 3. Ext. A3 – Photocopy of ATM Slip of TxN No.1123,1124 dtd.15/10/10 4.Ext.A4 – Photocopy of ATM Slip of TxN No.1125 15/10/10 5.Ext.A5 – Photocopy of order passed by Ombudsman 6.Ext.A6 – Photocopy of ATM transactions details of 15/10/10 sent by opposite party to the complainant dated 22/10/10 Exhibits marked on the side of the Opposite Party 1.Ext. B1 – Copy of notice received by 2nd opposite party from Banking Ombudsman dated 11/4/11 2.Ext. B2 – Copy of reply letter sent by 2nd opposite party to Bnaking Ombudsman dated 27/4/11 3.Ext.B3 – Copy of Account Statement of complainant at SBI, Ottapalam branch 4.Ext.B4 - Photocopy of Order of Banking Ombudsman dated 25/5/11 Cost Allowed Rs.1,000/- allowed as cost of the proceedings. | 
