DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.

        Case No.108/13           (100% Blind Person)

Sh. Prem Chand

DG-1/3A, LIG Flats

Vikaspuri, New Delhi-110018                                         ….Complainant

Versus

1.       State Bank of Hyderabad

          Scope Complex, Core-6,

          Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003

2.       State Bank of India

          Nangal Raya Branch

New Delhi                                                          ….Opposite Parties  

                                                          Date of Institution          : 01.03.13                                      Date of Order     14.02.17

Coram:

Sh. N.K. Goel, President

Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member

In short, the case of the Complainant is that he took a balance confirmation statement from SBI ATM machine, Vikaspuri which was showing Rs.94595.04 as balance on 26.03.12 at 20:27 PM.  He tried to withdraw Rs.20,000/- but the machine did not dispense any cash  and did not generate any balance slip as the machine was hanging. He again tried to withdraw the money but again the same problem occurred. He left the SBI ATM   without any money. Thereafter, he went to the ATM of  Bank of Baroda in the nearest  area and tried two times to withdraw the money but the same were declined. In the meantime, he received an SMS  confirmation on his mobile No.9650131320 showing that his account had been debited for a sum of Rs.40,000/-  in one transaction.   He rushed back to SBI ATM and took a mini statement which showed that a sum of Rs.40,000/- had been debited from his account . According to him, “the whole occurrence has been between 8.27 PM to 8.45/50 PM Because BOB decline my withdrawal, SBI has already debited my a/c”.  He made a complaint to the OPs on 29.03.2012 but to of no avail. Hence, pleading deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the complainant has filed the present complaint for issuing  following directions to the OPs:-

“(a)     To direct the respondent to reopen the case and pay rupees 100000/- recover the damages as well as the compensation for my mental agony and pain caused by the respondent in appropriate Court of Law.

(b)      To pass the order to give my balance payment with interest.

 (c)     To asked the bank how can possible Rs. 40000/-dispense by the said ATM in just 1 minute from two different ATM Machine or in one transaction.”

OP No.1 in the written statement has inter-alia stated that as per JP log, Switch Centre Report the transaction of Rs.40,000/- was successful from SBI ATM ID S10A000733110, Vikaspuri, Delhi on 26.03.2012 at 20:28 hrs. (is proved) It is further submitted that the complainant successfully withdrew Rs.40,000/- from the SBI ATM, Vikaspuri, Delhi and the presence of the complainant in the SBI ATM, Vikaspuri on 26.03.2012 at 20:28 hrs. (is proved) from the footage of CCTV SBI ATM filed with the complaint. The complainant also approached to the Banking Ombudsman on 29.06.12 vide complaint No.201112014009162 which was dismissed on 23.08.12. It is submitted that the footage is not required because the complainant himself provided a CD to the complainant counsel and the same clearly showed the presence of the complainant at the ATM.  Denying any deficiency in service on its part OP No.1 has prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

In its reply OP No.2 has inter-alia stated that the complainant himself withdrew an amount of Rs.40,000/- from the ATM  as per the record of the Bank. It is further stated that when the said ATM card was not blocked by the complainant before the said transaction which was in the care, custody and possession of the complaint it clearly indicates to one inference only that the said transaction was conducted by the complainant himself or through someone else under his directions/instructions.  It is further submitted that the OP No.2 duly verified the claim of the complainant and found that the said transaction  of Rs.40,000/- was successful and no excess amount was found in the said ATM machine; that had  it been a case of unsuccessful transaction, the complainant would have received a slip mentioning “unsuccessful transaction”; that filing of the receipt by the complainant clearly indicates that the complainant  had duly received the said amount of Rs.40,000/- from the said ATM Machine. It is submitted that when admittedly complainant received the mini statement slip from the said ATM machine, it is highly improbable that he would not have received unsuccessful transaction slip. Copies of JP log, switch centre  report are filed. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

In the rejoinder to the written statement of OP No.1 the complainant has stated that the complainant enquired balance on 26.03.2012 at 20.27 in ATM machine S10G000733109 but  as per the report filed by the OP the money was disbursed from machine No.S10G000733110 at 20.28:16 on 26.03.2012 and how can it  be possible that the money was disbursed from the machine No. S10G000733110 just after one minute without inserting the card. It is further submitted that no footage has been provided from  where the money was disbursed i.e. machine No. S10G000733110 at 20.28.16. It is submitted that due to negligent act with the connivance and collusion of OP, the complainant’s account was hacked and later on debited by Rs.40,000/- and due to that complainant has suffered  financial losses and mental agony.

In the rejoinder to the written statement of OP No.2 the complainant has taken the same stand as in the rejoinder to the W.S. of OP No.1.

Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, evidence by way of affidavit and additional affidavit of Sh. M.N.S. Prasad, Chief Manager have been filed on behalf of the OP No.1 while affidavit of Sh. Dal Chand, Chief Manager has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.

Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the Complainant and OP No.1. 

We have heard the arguments on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the material placed before us.

According to the Complainant himself, after checking  the balance amount in his back account he tried to withdraw Rs.20,000/- each from the ATM machine Vikaspuri twice but the machine  did not dispense the money nor generated the balance slip.  It is not his case that ATM machine No.S10G00073110 was not installed with ATM machine No.S10G000733109 at Vikaspuri, New Delhi.  Balance  amount sheet  has been filed on the record by the Complainant which shows  that  he had made the said inquiry from the latter machine on 26.03.2012 and withdrawn Rs. 40,000/- from the former ATM machine.  Copy of the JP Log Book has been filed as exhibit RW1/B which proves that an amount of Rs 40,000/- had been withdrawn from the former machine, that is, ATM machine No. S10A000733110 at 20:28 hrs. Copy of the Switch  Centre Report   has also been filed as Ex. RW1/C which proves that the amount of Rs. 40,000/- had been withdrawn from the bank account   of the Complainant on 26.03.2012 and that the transaction had been successful.  Ex.RW1/D is the copy of the cash verification report dated 26.03.2012 in respect of ATM machine S10A00732110. The Complainant has given wrong ATM machine No. in his rejoinder to the WS of OP No. 1 with some ulterior motives. We do not have any reason to disbelieve documents filed on behalf of the OPs which were maintained in due course of their official duties.  Hence, we hold that the Complainant had in fact withdrawn Rs. 40,000/- from his bank account through the ATM transaction.  Hence, we hold that no deficiency has been proved on behalf of the OPs.

In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the complaint and dismiss it with no order as to costs.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations.  Thereafter file be consigned to record room.

Announced on 14.02.17.