Date of Filing : 26.11.2015

Date of Disposal : 15.02.2022

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

DATED : 15.02.2022

PRESENT

HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

Mr K B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mrs DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER

APPEAL No.1045/2015

 The Manager

 Canara Bank
 Circle Office
 Nazarbad
 Mysuru – 570 0
 (By Mr T P Muthanna, Advocate)                                      Appellant                                              

      -Versus -

Sri N D Sudhindra
S/o Late Sri N Dharma Rao
No.26, 5^th  Block
Madhuvan Layout
Srirampura

Mysuru - 570 002
(By Mr Sudindhra N D, Advocate)                                   Respondent                                                                                                        

            : ORDER :

Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1.       This is an Appeal filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, by OP1 aggrieved by the Order dated 30.10.2015 passed in Consumer Complaint No.1704/2014 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mysuru (for short, the District Forum).

2.       Heard the arguments.   Perused the Impugned Order, Records and Grounds of Appeal.  Admittedly, the Complainant is a SB Account holder of Canara Bank, Vivekananda Nagar Branch, Mysuru. From the records, it is observed that on 10.09.2014, the Complainant drew an amount of Rs.3,000/- at 11.35 am in SBM ATM and left the slip in ATM.   The allegation of the Complainant is that on 12.09.2014, when he operated the ATM for generating a Mini Statement, he came to know about an alleged withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- from his account at 11.37 am and submitted a written Complaint given to the OP1 to set right his Account by re-crediting the sum of Rs 10,000/- which was not drawn by him.  Since the same was not set right, filed the instant Complaint.

3.  On service of notice, OP1  contested the case, taken a stand that PIN number of the ATM-cum-Debit Card in possession of the Complainant is known only to the complainant and he is only liable to withdraw the amount from ATM.    As per extract of transaction of ATM, maintained by the system on 10.09.2014, it shows that the Complainant has withdrawn Rs.3,000/- & Rs.10,000/- respectively, the transactions were successful and the same is recorded in the Electronic Journal of ATM of the Bank.  In this regard, footage of the recordings in the CC TV Camera has been handed over to the concerned Jurisdictional Police on 30.09.2014 and the investigation is in progress.

4.       The District Forum after enquiring into the matter, allowed the Complaint with direction to the OP to pay the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant, Rs.5,000/-  as Compensation for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- towards litigation cost to the Complainant with an observation that when the Complainant was operating the ATM, a person with helmet was allowed inside the ATM by the Security Guard and this has gone to show that OP1 is not providing the required level of security inside the ATM and that in the statement that un-connected persons are allowed inside the ATM when the genuine customers are operating the ATM  appears to be an element truth and that cash has been taken by someone, once the Complainant left the ATM, amounts to deficiency in service.   Thus, the finding recorded by the District Forum in directing the OP1 to pay Rs.10,000/- and other reliefs to the Complainant is just & proper and in our considered opinion the same does not call for any interference.   Accordingly, Appeal is Dismissed with no order as to costs.

5.       Amount in Deposit is ordered to be transfer to the District Forum for disbursement to the Complainant.  Return the LCR forthwith.

6.       Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission as well as to the parties concerned.

Lady Member                Judicial Member                       President

*s