Consumer Complaint No. 95 of 2016

Date of filing: 25.5.2016                                                                 Date of disposal: 07.3.2017

Complainant:               Md. Ziaul Haque, S/o. Md. Fazlul Haque, resident of Rail Par, Naya Mahalla, N.R.R. Road, Near Baitussalat Masjid, Asansol, PO: Asansol, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 302.

-V E R S U S-

Opposite Party:    1.     S.B.I. Dhadka Branch, represented by its Branch Manager, having its office at Block No. CJ, Sector H, Kalyanpur Satelite Township, PO. & PS: Asansol, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 302.

2.      The Manager, S.B.I. Main Branch, Kachari Road, Court Compound, PO., PS. & District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 101.

Present:      Hon’ble President: Sri Asoke Kumar Mandal.

                        Hon’ble Member: Smt. Silpi Majumder.

           Hon’ble Member:  Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha.

Appeared for the Complainant                   :   Ld. Advocate, Suvro Chakraborty.

Appeared for the Opposite Party No.1 & 2:  Ld. Advocate, Soham Som & Ors.

J U D G E M E N T

This complaint is filed by the Complainant u/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice against the OPs as the OPs though credited the amount of Rs.1800/- after about seven months from its illegal deduction on 13.08.2015, but did not pay him interest on the amount of Rs.1800/- till filing of this complaint.

The brief fact of the case of the Complainant is that he being a customer of the OP-1 had availed of the facility of using an ATM card and used to pay the service charge for its using. The said card is valid till today. On 13.08.2015 he went to withdraw a sum of Rs.1800/- from the ATM machine bearing no-1BBN000011024 at about 05.20 pm for his necessity. He punched the ATM card and typed the amount in the said machine. While the machine was in process load shedding occurred and due to this reason service of the machine stopped and he could not receive the required amount. The Complainant waited for 20 minutes with a view to observe as to whether the service is resuming again or not, but the machine did not start due to want of electricity. On the very next day the Complainant went to the OP-1 to report the said problem and prayed for necessary assistance, the OP-1 assured him that he will get back his amount very soon, but actually nothing occurred. The Complainant made several requests to the OPs for refunding the amount. On 20.08.2015 i.e. after 07 days from the date of occurrence the OP-1 provided the toll free phone number of the customer care service to him. The Complainant lodged his complaint before the customer care service through the toll free number and the customer care lodged his complaint vide ticket no-AT429219927042, but he did not get any response from their end. Thereafter the Complainant took another attempt to resolve his problem by lodging further complaint before the OP-1 vide ticket no-AT4292021194 dated 05.09.2015. But in this time also the OP-1 did not pay any heed to his request. Then the Complainant sent a written representation to the General Manager of the OPs on 17.10.2015, but inspite of receipt the same the OPs did not take any step in that regard. Lastly on 05.03.2016 the OPs credited the amount of Rs.1800/- in his bank account i.e. after almost 07 months without any interest. According to the Complainant he is very much entitled to get interest on the said amount as the OPs have enjoyed the same for about long 07 months. He prayed for interest before the OPs, but as his grievance have not been redressed by the OPs, hence having no alternative he has approached before this Ld. Forum by filing this complaint praying for direction upon the OPs to pay interest @18% p.a. on the amount of Rs.1800/- from 13.08.2015 to till the payment of the entire realization, to pay him compensation of Rs.50,000/- due to mental pain, agony and harassment and litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

The petition of complaint have been contested by the OPs by filing written version contending that the entire allegations as leveled against these OPs are all vague, false and baseless. The OPs have stated that as and when the complaint came to the knowledge of the OP-1, then and there toll free number was supplied to the Complainant to lodge the complaint before the customer care, but unfortunately the Complainant has failed to supply the appropriate information about the machine number of the said ATM counter, transaction ID number etc, the complaint could not be resolved by the OP-1. Therefore delay occurred to credit the amount in his bank account was due to the laches of the Complainant, but from the end of the OPs. The Complainant supplied the transaction ID no as IBHN 00011022:5502/21310036/000 instead of IBBN00011024:7917/17222227/000, for this reason the matter took time to resolve and in this respect there is no negligence on the part of the OPs, rather deficiency occurred on behalf of the Complainant. On 17.10.2015 written representation was made by the OPs with the Complainant, but the Complainant had also supplied wrong information regarding the transaction ID. Therefore inspite of taking proper initiative by the OPs, due to wrong information given by the Complainant the OPs have failed to solve the dispute. It is true that the Complainant lodged several complaints before the customer care on different dates i.e. on 13.08.2015 AT429223244314, AT429219927042 dated 20.08.2015 and AT4299220211194, but in every complaint the OP-1 asked for providing the details of the transaction, but the Complainant failed to supply the proper information and for this reason delay occurred to credit the amount. On 01.03.2016 the Complainant supplied the proper information regarding the transaction vide complaint no-AT4292223244357 and since receipt of the said information the complaint was solved by the OPs within 04 days i.e. 05.03.2016, on that date an amount of Rs.1800/- was credited in the account of the Complainant. From the documents supplied by the OPs it is crystal clear that the OPs have resolved the complaint of the Complainant within 04 days from the date of receipt of the proper information from the Complainant. As the proper information was not given by the Complainant to the OPs and the same was suppressed, hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The OPs have further submitted that the SBI, Burdwan Branch has no connection with the instant dispute and there is no specific allegation made against the OP-2, but in the instant complaint both OPs have made parties unnecessarily, hence this complaint suffers from mis-joinder of parties. The ATM counter from where money was deducted i.e. Asansol, the same has not been made a party in this proceeding; hence this complaint suffers from non-joinder of necessary party. The OPs have mentioned that the responsibility to operate the ATM card carefully because every responsibility regarding the ATM card belongs to the card holder. The ATM card can only be used if the customer inputs his four digit identification number which is selected by the customer and no one can operate without putting four digit identification numbers. In the interest of security the customer is advised to retain this PIN in his memory. The OPs have relied on some judgments passed by the upper Forums/Commissions. According to the OPs the complaint being devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost.

The Complainant has adduced evidence on affidavit along with several documents in support of his contention. The OPs have filed written notes of arguments with a copy to the other side. The OPs have filed some documents by way of firisty in support of their argument and the OPs have also filed the photocopies of the relied judgments with a copy to the other side.

We have carefully perused the record; documents filed by the contesting parties and the judgments on which the OPs have placed their reliance and heard argument at length advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the contesting parties. It is seen by us that on 13.08.2015 a sum of Rs.1800/- was deducted from the account of the Complainant, maintained with the SBI while he went for withdrawal of the said amount at the ATM counter at Asansol through his ATM card. Though deduction was made but the Complainant did not get the said amount due to some reason. Though the Complainant has alleged that due to load shedding the questioned machine stopped working at the time while his request was in processing and due to this reason the amount was not available to him, but in this connection the Complainant did not adduce any evidence from the appropriate authority that load shedding occurred and due to this reason he did not get the amount. But admittedly the amount was deducted from the account of the Complainant due to some reason on 13.08.2015. After deduction the Complainant made contact with the OP-1 and according to its advice lodged the complaint with the customer care. Though ticket number was provided to him, but according to the Complainant no fruitful step was taken by the OP-1 towards refunding the deducted amount in his bank account. Ultimately after lapse of about 07 months the said amount was credited in the account of the Complainant. The allegation of the Complainant is that though the said amount was credited in his account after lapse of 07 months by the OPs, but no amount was given by the OPs towards interest component. The case of the OPs is that due to wrong information provided by the Complainant in connection of his complaints on several times, the dispute/complaint could not be dissolved by the OPs. According to the OPs as there was no deficiency in service on behalf of the OPs, the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief as sought for.

We have noticed that the Complainant lodged several complaints with the customer care of the OPs being numbers-AT429219927042 dated 13.08.2015 & AT4292021194 dated 05.09.2015. At the time of lodgment of the complaints proper information was sought for regarding Transaction ID number and the Complainant had supplied the same as IHBN000011022:5502/21310036/000 instead of IBBN00011024:7917/17222227/000. As the Complainant provided the wrong Transaction number, the OPs could not solve the dispute of the Complainant for a prolonged period. Through e-mail the OPs wanted to know the correct Transaction number from the Complainant, but in a similar manner the same was provided as wrong. Ultimately the Complainant provided the correct Transaction number on 01.03.2016 and within 04 days from the date of supply the same the OPs have credited the amount of Rs.1800/- in the account of the Complainant without making any further delay. In this regard it is noticed by us that the OPs have fully complied with the Rules and Regulations of the Reserve Bank of India. Therefore we are constrained to hold that there was any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. In our view as due to negligence and laches on the part of the Complainant delay occurred in crediting the amount, hence the Complainant is not entitled to get any amount towards interest. It is true until and unless proper and correct information is provided by the customer to the Bank, the bank cannot be held liable for making payment of interest due to delay in crediting of the amount.

The OPs have taken the plea that the complaint suffers from non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties as the instant OPs have no role in the present dispute of the Complainant, rather the actual OP-Asansol ATM, from where his amount was deducted, the same has not been a necessary party in this proceeding. According to the OPs on this score only the complaint should be dismissed.  In respect of such contention of the OPs that based on the plea of either non-joinder or mis-joinder or both, the complaint cannot be dismissed having regard to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Savita Garg (supra). So the prayer as made by the OPs cannot be entertained.

It is noticed by us that as the complaint is devoid of any merit, hence it fails.

Going by the foregoing discussion hence, it is

Ordered

that the complaint be dismissed on contest. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the complaint there is no order as to cost.

Let the copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.

                   (Asoke Kumar Mandal)        

             Dictated and corrected by me.                                                           President       

                                                                                                                  DCDRF, Burdwan

                      (Silpi Majumder)                                                       

                          Member                                                                       

                     DCDRF, Burdwan

                                                     (Pankaj Kumar Sinha)                           (Silpi Majumder)

                                                            Member                                                   Member    

                                                       DCDRF, Burdwan                               DCDRF, Burdwan