MS. NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

1. In brief facts of the present case are that the complainant is holding a saving bank account bearing no.10861848491 with OP at its Nirankari Colony Branch. It is further stated that in the second week of September, 2015 complainant visited OP Branch where he was informed by official of OP that there are two entries/transactions of withdrawals for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- each from his account on 08.09.2015. After getting the information complainant immediately contact the branch head and inform him that he has not withdrawn a sum of Rs. 40,000/- from his account on 08.09.2015, he also informed the Branch head that he had never visited Vani Vihar, Uttam Nagar and had not used the ATM Card. It is alleged by the complainant that it is not possible to withdraw Rs. 40,000/- each from his saving bank account when the limit of withdrawal in a single day is Rs. 40,000/-. It is further alleged by the complainant that the ATM Card, PIN and passbook was lying in his safe custody and he has not shared any information in respect to the account in question with anybody. Upon hearing the entire story narrated by complainant the official of the OP advised him to lodged the complaint with Police Station, as such complainant lodged the complaint in respect to the aforesaid unauthorized transaction with P.S Mukharjee Nagar and also lodged the complaint with OP Bank. It is alleged by the complainant that despite filing the complaint no steps has been taken by the OP  Bank to redress the grievance of the complainant. Complainant further submit that without the collusion of the official of the OP Bank the unauthorized transaction in question could not be carried as there is the limit of Rs. 40,000/- for withdrawal from the ATM in a single day and there is two transactions of Rs. 40,000/- each unauthorized carried out in his account, hence he is entitled for the relief claim. The non redressal of his grievance by officials of OP Bank compelled the complainant to knock the door of this Commission, hence, this complaint. 
2. Notice of the complaint was sent to OP. OP filed its written statement wherein it denied any deficiency in service on its part. It is further stated that the record shows that the amount of Rs. 40,000/- each were withdrawn on 07.09.2015 at 23:49:17 and on 08.09.2015 at 00:09:44 vide RR No. 6173 and 6199 twice by using the ATM Debit Card on 08.09.2015. This amount can only be withdrawn by a person using Debit Card and the PIN thereof. The withdrawal of the sum of Rs. 40,000/- were not a single day but on 07.09.2015 and 08.09.2015. It is further stated that the CCTV footage along with the copy of EJ Log of the ATM used by him was provided to the complainant vide letter dated 17.10.2015. It is further stated that as per the JP Log report and reconciliation statement the transaction was complete and carried out through the ATM in possession of the complainant, hence, the present complaint be dismissed being frivolous one.
3. Complainant filed rejoinder to the WS of OP and denied all the allegations made therein and reiterated contents of complaint. It is stated that complainant is entitled to all the reliefs claimed in the complaint.
4. Complainant filed evidence by way of his affidavit and reiterated contents of complaint. Complainant relied on copy of the complaint dated 28.09.2015, 10.09.2015 lodged with the Branch Head as well as Nodal Officer of OP Bank. Copy of complaint lodged with P.S Mukherjee Nagar, copy of the passbook in support of his contention.
5.  OP filed evidence by way of affidavit of Sh. M.K. Madhukar Branch Manager, Nirankari colony, Delhi and reiterated contents of WS.
6. Written arguments filed by complainant as well as by OP.
7. We have heard the arguments advance at the bar by counsel for complainant Sh. Sushil Kumar Singh and Ms. Mayuri Chawla counsel for OP and have perused the record.
8. It is argued by the OP that Rs. 40,000/- each were withdrawn on 07.09.2015 at 23:49:17 and on 08.09.2015 at 00:09:44 vide RR No. 6173 and 6199 twice by using the ATM Debit Card. Complainant  had withdrawn  a sum of Rs.40,000/- each from ATM machine, the JP Log report shows the status of “ATM TALLIED”.   In support of his contention she has drawn our attention toward JP Log report.  Perusal of the same reveals that on 07.09.2015 and on 08.09.2015 the complainant has used his ATM Card for withdrawal of Rs.80,000/- .  The report placed by the OP shows that the transactions was successful one.
9. According to OP, there was no possibility of a third person withdrawing the cash using the ATM card unless the card along with PIN was available to him.
10. It is a general practice that an ATM Card can only be used if the customer inputs his personal four digit identification number which is selected by the customer and not by the Bank. In the interest of security the customer is advised to retain this PIN in his memory so that no one else is privy to this information. The reverse of the ATM has a magnetic strip and white strip for signature of the cardholder. The Magnetic strip contains the cardholder’s details. This card can be used to gain entry into ATM enclosure by swiping it in the access lodge. In other words, unless a person is in possession of the relevant ATM Card and knows, the four digit PIN, the ATM Card cannot be used and operated. (Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble NCDRC in RP NO. 3973/2014 titled as Raghabendra Nath Sen vs. Punjab National Bank decided on 17.12.2014)
11. In the present case, admittedly, the complainant lodged first complaint with OP bank on 10.09.2015 whereas the incident of unauthorized withdrawal was arose on 07.09.2015 and 08.09.2015, moreover, the complainant has not alleged that his ATM card was misplaced, in fact, the same is in his possession and as per the procedure without PIN number no one can access the ATM card or can use it. The complainant has not even impleaded Bank of India from whose ATM the alleged unauthorized transaction was carried out in the array of parties. After going through the JP Log report we are of the considered view that the complainant has used his ATM Card and withdrew a sum of Rs.80,000/- from his account, the transaction is successful one, hence, no deficiency in service can be made out against OP as alleged in the complaint.
12. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the complainant failed to establish the case of deficiency in service on the part of OP. Therefore, we find no merits in the present complaint same is hereby dismissed.        
13. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost as per order dated 04.04.2022 of Hon’ble State Commission after receiving an application from the parties in the registry. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.

Announced in open Commission on  26.06.2024.

SANJAY KUMAR                                                                NIPUR CHANDNA                             

           PRESIDENT                                                                         MEMBER