DATE OF FILING : 25.06.2014.
DATE OF S/R : 30.07.2014.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 23.12.2015.
Nabin Chandra Dutta,
son of late Prahallad Chandra Dutta,
residing at West Santinagar ) Prantik ), Church Road,
P.O. Anandanagar, Bally, P.S. Nischinda, District Howrah,
PIN 711227. ………………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.
State Bank of India,
Bally Ghoshpara Branch,
having its address at D.C. Neogi Road ( North ), P.O. Ghoshpara,
P.S. Nischinda, District Howrah.……………………………………OPPOSITE PARTY.
P R E S E N T
Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.
Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .
F I N A L O R D E R
- This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Nabin Chandra Dutta, against the o.p. praying for a direction upon the o.p. to pay him Rs. 98,990/- with statutory interest till realization and to pay compensation and litigation costs.
- The case of the petitioner is that he is a railway employee and a consumer of the o.p. bank S.B.I., Ghoshpara Branch, Bally, being his account no. 11341177593 with debit cum ATM Card facility bearing account no. 622018020610032245. On 05.04.2013 at about 10.34 p.m. he received S.M.S. in his cell phone stating that Rs. 49,000/- has been withdrawn from his account by a company namely Billdesk.com through POS( the point of sale ) vide transaction no. ID 201317870348 and in the same night at 3.28 a.m. on 16.4.2013 he received another S.M.S. that an amount of Rs. 49,990/- was withdrawn by the said Billdesk.com. through POS vide transaction no. ID 201321908524. Thus by the two local transactions a sum of Rs. 98,990/- was fraudulently withdrawn from the bank account of the petitioner by the said Billdesk.com. even though the debit card ATM Card was all along remained under the custody of the petitioner who had no transaction on 15.04.2013 and 16.4.2013. The petitioner informed the matter to the Customer Care of his bank and personally visited the bank and gave a written complaint to the branch manager and another complaint in Nischinda Police Station. On the basis of complaint police started P.S. Case No. 55 of 2013 on 17.4.2013. The petitioner sent application before the Zonal Manager, S.B.I. and also to the Chief General Manager and also the D.I.G., C.I.D., at CID / Cyber Crime Cell, Bhabani Bhawan, Kolkata 27, and also the Banking Ombudsman but the same was not entertained. The activities of the o.p. bank amounted to gross deficiency in service on their part and so he filed this case.
- The o.p. bank contested the case by filing a written version denying the allegations made against them and submitted that against the bank account of the petitioner debit cum ATM facility was available to him and the ATM card was held by him as well as the four digit secret pin number of the said card. Unless and until the petitioner disclosed the pin number of the said card to somebody else who also possessed the ATM Card it was not possible for him to make such transaction. On receipt of the complaint, the bank through its head office investigated the matter through website and sent the matter to the department asking for providing details of I.D. address of potential customer account and said investigation revealed that those transactions were through POS and were successful transactions. Thus, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the bank and the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.
- Upon pleadings of parties the following points arose for determination :
- Is the case maintainable in its present form ?
- Whether the petitioner has any cause of action to file the case ?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.,
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
- All the issues are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity for discussion and to skip of reiteration. This Forum heard the ld. counsel of both sides on the case and also perused and considered the written arguments filed by the parties and also the complaint petition a well as written version. The petitioner submitted before the Forum that on 15.04.2013 at about 10.34 p.m. he received SMS on his cell phone that Rs. 49,000/- has been withdrawn from his bank account due to a sale transaction and the amount went in favour of one company Billdesk.com. and in the same night at 03.28 a.m. dated 16.04.2013 he received another message that another sum of Rs. 49,990/- was withdrawn from his account in favour of the said company through POS and the transaction also stated therein. The allegation of the petitioner is that he informed the matter to the Branch Manager to General Manager, police and C.I.D. and also Banking Ombudaman but in vain and he further submitted that he never used the ATM Card on 15.04.2013 and on 16.04.2013 and there was no question of purchase by him in the night and the activities of the bank showed gross negligence on their part and the same amounts deficiency in service. He filed affidavit as well as the copy of FIR and his letter to several Managers of SBI and also statement of account which showed that on 15th & 16th April, 2013 the above two amounts viz. Rs. 49,000/- and Rs. 49,990/- were withdrawn in favour of Billdesk.com. on the ground of POS i.e., due to some sale the amount withdrawn and credited in favour of Billdesk.com. which is a service bureau offering billers, banks and customers and it is the easiest, fastest and safest way of making payments. In respect of Billdesk.com. having its office at Kolkata yet the petitioner did not make the said Billdesk. com. a party defendant of the case as to wherefrom i.e., from which mobile number a person went on line and got access to the bills and made payment on line in favour of Billdesk com. but the said company is not a party which could have divulged the truth behind such two transactions.
- Further this ATM card was in the safe custody of the petitioner who alleged withdrawal of two amounts being Rs. 49,000/- and Rs. 49,990/- in favour of Billdesk. com. in the night of 15.4.2013 and 16.4.2013 around 10 p.m. and 3 a.m. It is noticed form the averments of the petition that the petitioner had the card in his custody and also the four digit secret pin number was known to him only and he did not disclose the same to any body. Thus the transaction as made over here cannot be unauthorized withdrawal rather it was withdrawn by the petitioner himself who had the ATM card with him and the pin number was within his knowledge or he disclosed the pin number to any of any family member to took possession of the ATM card for the time being and made the payments of the bills through net using a mobile phone for which the bank cannot be held responsible and this Forum does not find any deficiency jin service on the part of the bank as it was automatic in the ATM system to deduct the amount from the account of the petitioner as soon as the transaction took place and it was a valid transaction.
In view of above discussion and findings this Forum finds that the petitioner miserably failed to prove his case and is not entitled to relief as prayed for.
Court fee paid is correct.
In the result, the application fails.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 347 of 2014 ( HDF 347 of 2014 ) be dismissed on contest without costs against the O.P.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.
DICTATED & CORRECTED
BY ME.
( B. D. Nanda )
President, C.D.R.F., Howrah.
