DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

 

CASE   NO:   CC- 54 of 2020

 

 

Smt. Babi Bhattacharjee,

W/O. Sri Shyamal Chakraborty,

Resident of-C/O. Ranabir Gope,

Opposite of Govt. Press office,

P.O. and P.S. A. D. Nagar, 

Dist.-West Tripura, Pin-799003 ….........…...................................................Complainant.

 

 

         -VERSUS-

 

 

 

1. State Bank of India, Head Office

Represented by its General Manager

Address-18 19, Devdas Kamlleg Block, Synergy Building

Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East,

Behind National Stock Exchange, Mumbai-400051.

 

 

2. State Bank of India, Agartala Branch,

Represented by its Branch Manager, 

Address-Hari Ganga Basak Road, 

P.O.-Agartala, P.S.-West Agartala,

Dist.-Tripura West, Pin-799001............................................................. Opposite Parties.

 

 

 

 

     __________PRESENT__________

 

 

 SRI RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 

C O U N S E L

 

 

For the Complainant : Sri Diptonu Debnath,

  Sri Kumar Sankar Sarma,

  Advocates. 

For the O.P. Nos.1&2 : None appeared. 

 

 

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON : 29/01/2021.

 

J U D G M E N T

          The Complainant Smt. Babi Bhattacharjeee, set the law in motion by presenting the complaint petition U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  complaining deficiency of service by the O.Ps. 

The Complainant's case, in brief, is that the Complainant is a customer of the State Bank of India, Agartala Branch having a savings Bank Account No.37748002379. She was also provided with an ATM Card bearing No.515740006513989 in connection with her said S/B A/c No.37748002379. The Complainant always kept the ATM Card in her possession and secured place and she never handover the ATM Card to anybody and also she did not disclose the PIN No. On 31st December, 2019 the Complainant went to the SBI, Bardowali Branch for depositing some money in her said S/B A/c by using the ATM card but it was found not working. On query with the Bank staffs of the SBI, Bardowali Branch, the Complainant could learnt that her ATM Card had been blocked by the O.P. Bank and she was advised to consult with the SBI, Agartala Branch, i.e. the O.P. No.2 in this regard. The Complainant on the same date went to the SBI, Agartala Branch and informed the matter the Bank officials and again she was informed that her ATM Card had been blocked by the Bank Authority, as ATM Card has been skimmed and  hacked and money had been unauthorisedly withdrawn from the aforesaid S/B A/c at Kolkata IOCL Petrol pump on 16/11/2019. The Complainant was provided a printout  copy taken from the computer system of the Bank i.e. the O.P. No.2 regarding the transaction details dated 16/11/2019. On that date the Complainant came to learnt that in total Rs.57,069/- had been withdrawn by way of six(06) transactions at IOCT Petrol pump at Kolkata. On that day a G.D. Entry was made at West Agartala P.S. by the Complainant. The Bank Officials of the O.P. No.2 assured the Complainant that they will take necessary steps for the refund of the money which were unauthorisedly withdrawn from her account. Thereafter, the Complainant on many occasions visited the O.P. No.2 i.e. the Bank to enquire about her remedy but no response. Finding no alternative the Complainant on 08/06/2020 send a letter to the O.P. No.2 with a copy to the O.P. No.1 requesting them to recover the amount or to refund the amount. Again no response. Hence, she filed the complaint seeking reliefs as prayed for including compensation on the ground of deficiency of service.  

2. On admission of the complaint notices were issued upon the O.Ps. But the O.Ps.  after receiving the notice did not turn up and consequently the case was proceeded ex-parte against them vide order dated 03/11/2020.  

EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE COMPLAINANT:-

Complainant has examined herself as PW-I and she submitted her examination-in-Chief by way of Affidavit. In this case the complainant produced 11 documents comprising 16 sheets under a Firisti dated 07/08/2020. The documents are namely Copy of pass book details of the complainant, Copy of the printout transaction details, Copy of the printed form of the G.D. Entry details, Copy of the Affidavit dated 01/01/2020 sworn by the Complainant, Aadhar Card of the Complainant, Copy of letter dated 08/06/2020 sent by the Complainant, Copy of letter sent to the address of General Manager, SBI, Copy of online news publication dated 19/11/2019, Copy of newspaper publication online regarding skimming of ATM Cards, Declaration made by the SBI & Copy of press release made by the SBI, Regional Manager, RBO Agartala. On identification the  documents are marked as Exhibit-I series.

           

POINTS TO BE DETERMINED:-

    Based on the averments made by the Complainant in the complaint and having regard to the evidences adduced by the complainant, the following points are cropped up for determination:

        (I) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps. towards the Complainant and have also indulged any unfair trade practices?

(II) Whether the complainant is entitled to get  any compensation/relief as prayed for?

 

              

5. ARGUMENTS :

We have heard arguments of Learned Advocate Mr. Diptonu Debnath of the Complainant. 

  Learned Advocate Mr. Debnath submitted that on 31/12/2019 the Complainant came to know that her ATM Card was blocked by the O.Ps. and she was never informed by the Bank Officials in this regard. Even the Complainant did not make any application to the O.P. Bank for blocking for her ATM Card. On the same date, she came to know from the Bank Official of the O.P. No.2 that her ATM Card was skimmed and hacked and in total amount of Rs.57,069/- had been unauthorizedly withdrawn from her SBI Account at IOCL Petrol pump, Kolkata. Mr. Debnath further argued that the Complainant were present all a long at Agartala in the month of November,2019. The Complainant did not visit Kolkata at any time in the year, 2019 and never her ATM Card was used at Kolkata, the ATM Card was also not stolen or lost. He further argued that after having learnt the above facts the Complainant so many times met with the Officials of the O.P. No.2 and she also submitted her necessary papers for getting back the money and also send letters to the O.Ps. but no response. He further submitted that the Complainant has been able to prove her complaint adducing evidence. Moreover, the O.Ps. did not contest the proceedings. So it can be presumed that the allegations is true. So the O.Ps. are liable to refund the money along with the suitable compensation.   

In support of the argument Learned Counsel Mr. Debnath relied upon one decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Revision Petition No.4868 of 2012 Vidyawanti Vs. State Bank of India & others. He also relied upon 2 nos. of decisions of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Uttarkhand & Punjab down loaded from internet.                     

6. DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION:

  We have carefully gone through the complaint as well as evidence including Exhibited documents. 

                    It is pertinent to mention that the O.Ps. did not context to the proceedings and accordingly it is proceeded ex-perte against them. 

                    On perusal of the complaint it is revealed that on 31/12/2019 the Complainant came to know that her ATM Card was not working and she enquired the matter after visiting SBI, Bardowali Branch from where she has learnt that her ATM Card had been blocked by the O.P. Bank and she was advised by the staff of SBI, Bardowali Branch to consult with the SBI, Agartala Branch, i.e. the O.P. No.2 in this regard. Accordingly, the same day she went to the SBI, Agartala Branch and the Bank official informed that her ATM Card had been blocked and she got a details of transaction from their computer system and she came to know that her ATM Card had been skimmed and hacked and somebody unauthorisedly withdrawn from her Savings Bank Account at Kolkata IOCL Petrol pump on 16/11/2019 by way of six(06) transaction and in total Rs.57,069/- were withdrawn from her Savings Bank Account. Thereafter, Bank Authority gave her assurance that they will see the matter to get the refund. The Complainant also informed the matter to West Agartala P.S. and a G.D. Entry was made. Thereafter, she on several occasions visited the SBI, Agartala Branch and enquired about the refund of the money but no good. Ultimately, she gave a letter to the Branch Manager, SBI, Agartala Branch on 08/06/2020 requesting to refund the money which was unauthorisedly withdrawn by committing fraud from her Savings Account. The copy of the letter was also send to the General Manager, SBI Head Office, Mumbai but no step was taken by the O.Ps. 

                 The Complainant submitted a detailed Examination-in-Chief on Affidavit running in eight(08) pages. From the evidence, we found that the Complainant has been able to prove her case. From the Exhibited documents we also find that the total amount of Rs.57,069/- were unauthorisedly withdrawn from her account and it was done at Kolkata while the Complainant was present at Agartala. We also find that inspite of having knowledge about the hacking of the Savings Bank Account of the Complainant, the O.Ps. did not take any step for refunding the money which amounts to deficiency in service. The O.Ps. Bank who were in banking business and earning profit out of it are liable to make good her loss. 

7.          So, we are in the opinion that the Complainant has been able to prove her case U/S. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in respect of deficiency of service by the O.Ps. 

               Hence, it is ordered that the O.Ps. will make refund the amount of Rs.57,069/- to the Savings Account bearing No. 37748002379  of the Complainant within 01 month along with interest @6% P.A. from the date on which the said amount was debited to her Savings Account or it is withdrawn from her Savings Account. 

                We also direct the O.Ps. Bank in addition will pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation costs and failing which the rate of interest will be increased @9% P.A. instead of @6%.                 

                 Supply a certified copy of the judgment to the Complainant free of cost.       

  The Complainant is directed to send a copy of the judgment to the O.P. No.2 within 7 days after receiving the copy. 

 

    Announced.

 

SRI  RUHIDAS  PAL

PRESIDENT,

DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA

 

 

 

 

  DR (SMT)  BINDU  PAL

 MEMBER, 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA