RBR/A/51/2018
Order No. 4 and final order
Today is fixed for hearing the appeal on merit. The appellant is present through Ld. Advocate. The respondent Nibir Sarkar is not present today. The concluding portion of hearing the appeal on the part of the appellant is heard.
This appeal is directed against the final order passed by Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Dakshin Dinajpur dated 23/05/2018 in respect of CC/22/2018. The fact of the case in nutshell is that the respondent Nibir Sarkar who was working as a civic volunteer had a savings bank account at SBI, Patirampur Branch bearing no. 3187639891 on 30/10/2017, he intended to withdraw Rs. 10,000 for his personal purpose, came at the CSP of Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch. The process of withdrawal Rs. 10,000 from his account was initiated through the CSP system of Allahabad Bank but during the time of processing the internet link became out of order and hence he could not collect the 10 thousand rupees from the said CSP system. Afterwards, he came to know that Rs. 10,000 was already debited from his account for such incomplete transaction. Ultimately, he had to endure a loss of sum of rupees ten thousand due to failure of the system. He then reported to the manager of Allahabad Bank and also contracted with the Branch Manager of SBI, Patirampore Branch and both the managers had assured him that they would take initiative so that he would be compensated for loss of Rs. 10,000. But ultimately both the banks had failed to compensate him which he had suffered due to failure of CSP system. At last he placed a consumer complaint before the Ld. Forum on 22/02/2018. Ld. Forum had admitted the case and issued the notice upon the opposite parties that is the Branch Manager of Allahabad Bank, the Manager of SBI, Patirampore Branch and the CSP operator engaged by Allahabad Bank named Shri Jay Siddhanta as OP no. 1,2 and 3. The SBI as OP no. 2 by submitting the written version admitted the fact that on 30/10/2017 a sum of Rs. 10,000 was deducted from the savings bank account of the complainant. And the said transaction was done from CSP of Allahabad Bank, Mohanahut Branch. On being informed about this loss of the complainant, the SBI, Patirampore Branch wrote a letter to Allahabad bank, Mohanahat Branch on 12/12/2017 with a request to help the complainant to get his money refund but the OP no. 1 Allahabad Bank did not make any response to the letter of the SBI, Patirampore Branch. The OP no. 1 and 3 that is Branch Manager of Allahabad Bannk, Mohanahat Branch and CSP operator Jay Siddhanta had jointly submitted the written version and contended that it was quite impossible to enquire for Allahabad Bank about the alleged failure transaction as such type of cash withdrawal takes place on regular basis under ACPS system. And they have no fault in this regard. The OP no. 1 and 3 of this consumer complaint case in their defense mention in W.V that they had no direct fault with regard to the failed transaction in the alleged incident and they have no liability to compensate the complaint. After hearing all sides Ld. Forum had passed the impugned order where State Bank of India, Patirampore Branch was directed to make immediate credit of Rs. 10,000 to the account of the complainant with an interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from 30/10/2017 and a compensation of Rs. 3,000 and litigation cost of Rs. 1,000 was ordered to be paid by the SBI, Patirampore Branch. And it is also ordered by the Ld. Forum upon the SBI, Patirampore Branch to have an enquiry and if there was any deficiency of service on the part of the OP no. 1 that is Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch then the OP no. 2 that is SBI will be entitled to recoup the whole ammount to be paid to the complainant from the OP no. 1.
Being aggrieved with this order the State Bank of India, Patirampore Branch has preferred the appeal on the ground that the Ld. Forum has not applied the judicial mind properly and the finding of the Ld. Forum was passed on mis conception and the order passed by the Ld. Forum was not vested with law. The appeal was admitted on its own merit and the respondents were issued notice asking them to appear and to contest the appeal. The respondent no. 1 had contested the case personally without appointing any legal representative. The Branch Manager of Allahabad Bank has contested this appeal case through Law officer Shri Abhirup Mukherjee. The respondent no. 3 Jay Siddhanta did not contest the appeal.
Decision with reasons
Having heard the Ld. Advocate of the appellant as well as the legal representative of Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch it is established that the respondent Nibir Sarkar has a savings bank account in SBI, Patirampore Branch and on 30/10/2017 he wanted to withdraw Rs. 10,000 from his account through CSP, Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch but the process of withdrawal became ineffective due to failure of link. Ultimately, Rs. 10,000 was debited from his account. It is established also beyond any doubt that both the Banks that is SBI, Patirampore and Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch were duly informed by the respondent no. 1 for his loss of rupees ten thousand. Both the Banks could not compensate the loss of the respondent no. 1 as both of them has blamed the failure of system and did not find any way out how to compensate a bona fide customer who has suffered a loss due to such system failure on the part of the Bank authority. The CSP system was introduced at Mohanahat Branch by the Allahabad Bank at their own interest for providing good customer service where the branch of banks have yet established. At the time of argument Ld. Advocate of the appellant pointed out that as soon as the process of withdrawal took place automatically, the money from the account of the respondent no. 1 was automatically deducted and debited from his account but the bank could not trace out as to where the money went out. The Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch on their part contended that the system introduced by the SBI was responsible for not providing the physical cash to the respondent no. 1 while the Allahabad Bank had no liability in this regard as because there was no ready reference generated through the CSP system introduced and installed at Allahabad Bank, Mohanahut Branch.
After going through the subject matter of the entire case as well as on perusal of the necessary documents submitted by both parties and on hearing the legal representatives of all sides of this case, the Commission find that the responsibility to compensate the complainant/respondent no. 1 definitely lies not only upon the SBI, Patirampore Branch but the liability should be shared equally between SBI, Patirampore Branch and Allahabad bank Mohanahut branch. So, in this regard the liabilities confined upon only SBI, Patirampore Branch is not acceptable one and in this regard this Commission find that the order of Ld. Forum suffers from irregularity. Ld. Forum has asked the SBI, Patirampore Branch to compensate the complainant and make an enquiry upon the deficiency of Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch which is also not feasible one as because in our banking system one nationalized bank cannot enquire about the affairs of another nationalized bank. Therefore, it is better that the loss which has suffered in this case by the complainant/respondent no. 1 to be equally compensated by SBI, Patirampore Branch and Allahabad Bank, Mohanahat Branch. The order of Ld. Forum regarding quantum of compensation and litigation cost appears to be reasonable and fair one. The Ld. Forum has asked the OP no. 2 to immediate credit Rs. 10,000 to the account of the complainant with an interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from 30/10/2017 is also not executable one as because in which way the Bank can credit Rs. 10,000 to the account of the respondent no. 1. So, it is better that to ask both the Banks to pay Rs. 5,000 each to the complainant/respondent no. 1 along with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum (Savings account interest rate) since 30.10.2017 within one month to the complainant/respondent no. 1 and the amount of compensation and litigation cost awarded by the Ld. Forum to be paid half of the amount by each bank to the complainant respondent no. 1 within a month. Thus, the appeal is hereby succeded in part.
Hence it is ordered: -
That the appeal be and the same is partly allowed on contest without any cost. The final order dated 23/05/2018 delivered by Ld. D.C.D.R.F, Dakshin Dinajpur in CC/22/2018 is modified as follows: -
- The Branch Manager of SBI, Patirampore Branch and Allahabad Bank, Mohanahut Branch are directed to pay Rs. 5,000 each to the respondent no. 1 Nibir Sarkar within one month along with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum since 30.10.2017 failing which additional interest of 10 per cent per annum will be carried with.
- The compensation amount of Rs. 3,000 and litigation cost of Rs. 1,000 will be paid by both the banks in equal share of apportionment within one month failing which 10 per cent as additional interest to be carried with over the money they are asked to pay.
- The order of Ld. Forum regarding direction upon op no. 2 that is SBI, Patirampore Brannch to enquire the deficiency of service of OP no. 1 Allahabad Bank is hereby set aside.
A copy of this order be handed over to the parties free of cost. The order of this appeal be communicated to the Ld. Forum through e-mail.
