O R D E R :-( per Mr. B.R. Chandel, President )
Admittedly, complainant Shri Ranu Ram is the holder of Saving Bank A/c No. 11306470763 with the opposite party No.1. He has also obtained ATM card No. 6220180626900001522. The complainant had Rupees 15,237/- in his account on 11-08-2012. The complainant was legally authorised to operate his ATM card in the ATM installed by the opposite party No.2. He applied his ATM card on 11-08-2012 at 8:15 AM for confirmation of balance in his account upon which a balance of Rupees 15,237/- was confirmed in his account.
2. In view of the above stated undisputed facts, the complainant has claimed that the opposite parties be directed to credit or pay Rupees 10,000/- along with interest and a compensation of Rupees 50,000/- along with cost of the complaint on the grounds that after getting confirmation of the balance of the said amount in his account, he applied the ATM card for withdrawal of Rupees 10,000/-, but the ATM did not respond nor any withdrawal was affected. Then the complainant gave way to another person standing in the queue who also processed the withdrawal for Rupees 11,000/- but the ATM did not respond as desired by him. The complainant again tried for withdrawal but failed. The complainant then during afternoon visited the ATM of opposite party No.1 and applied the ATM card for withdrawal of Rupees 5,000/-which was successful. In the meantime he got a message in his mobile phone and when he was going through the message, he noted one more message in respect of withdrawal of Rupees 10,000/- from the ATM of opposite party No.2, upon which he got shocked and filed a complaint on toll free number which revealed that there was a valid transaction and advised to contact the concerned branch. Since there was Sunday on 12-08-2012 the complainant approached the opposite party No.2 on 13-08-2012 and complained the matter, but the opposite party No.2 did not respond, then he filed a written complaint on 14-08-2012 before the opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 assured to conduct an inquiry and called him several times, but did not respond. On 30-08-2012 the opposite party No.1 advised the complainant to again file the complaint which was again filed by the complainant and handed over to J.P. Log. The complainant visited opposite party No.2 to supply the footage but the opposite party did not show the same hence he approached the local police , upon whose instance the CCTV clippings were preserved and shown to the complainant and the opposite parties have failed to redress the grievance of the complainant in spite of several visits and requests made which amounts to deficiency in service due to which he has suffered monetary loss , harassment and mental tension.
3. The opposite party No.1 disputed the said claim and has set up the defence that on 11-08-2012 the complainant had succeeded in withdrawing a sum of Rupees 10,000/- from the ATM of opposite party No.2 at 8:21:40 AM and immediately the complainant received the message regarding the same in his mobile, but he did not react immediately, hence it appears that he had withdrawn the amount of Rupees 10,000/- from the ATM of opposite party No.2. He did not rush to operate the CCTV footage after 8:15 AM to 8:20 PM to opposite party No.2 and as such he had withdrawn Rupees 10,000/- from the ATM of opposite party No.2 at 8:21:40 AM and the same was debited from the account of the complainant maintained by the opposite party No.1 hence the opposite party No.1 has committed no deficiency in service.
4. The opposite party No.2 also disputed the claim of the complainant and has also set up the defnce that the complainant has successfully withdrawn a sum of Rupees 10,000/- on 11-08-2012 through its ATM vide transaction No. 4176 of J.P. report and as per J.P. Roll the transaction code is 00 which is successful. The CCTV clipping/footage was also shown to the complainant at his request and when he applied for saving of footage of CCTV cemara on 08-10-2012 the same was replied and as such the opposite party No.2 has not committed any deficiency in service.
5. During the course of proceeding this Forum directed the opposite party No.2 to produce CCTV footage before this Forum. The opposite party has produced the same in the form of CD which has been received in evidence as Annexure PX. The video footage Annexure PX was examined in presence of ld. Counsel for the parties and opposite party No.2 of the date 11-08-2012 from 8:20AM to 11:45AM. It was clear in the CCTV footage that the complainant applied the ATM card for balance confirmation which was duly confirmed by getting a confirmation slip by him. In the ATM transaction code slip Annexure OP2/A the complainant has been shown to have applied the ATM card on 11-08-2012 at 8:21 AM for withdrawal of Rupees 10,000/- and the withdrawal was successful but the said fact stood falsified by the CCTV footage Annexure PX. It was clear from CCTV footage that the complainant applied for withdrawal of the amount , but the withdrawal was not successful between 8:20 AM to 8:45 AM. Even another person who applied for withdrawal after the complainant , the withdrawal in his favour was also not successful. The CCTV footage has clearly falsified the entries showing successful withdrawal of Rupees 10,000/- in ATM transaction code list Annexure OP-2/A. There is also some difference of time in the CCTV footage and ATM transaction code list Annexure OP-2/A which could not be explained on behalf of the opposite party No.2. A successful transaction by some person has also been shown in the said footage. The opposite party No.2 has failed to explain as to how the withdrawal has not been shown successful in the CCTV footage. Although, the amount of Rupees 10,000/- has been debited from the account of opposite party No.1, but the same has not been received by the complainant after application of the ATM card by him in the ATM of opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.2 has also failed to explain the contradiction in the entries of the ATM transaction code list regarding transaction of Rupees 10,000/- and non withdrawal of the said amount shown in the CCTV footage. Both the records are prepared by the office of opposite party No.2. The complainant represented the matter to both the opposite parties. The opposite party No.1 has taken up the defence that the amount of Rupees 10,000/- has been debited from his account maintained by it hence there is no fault on the part of opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.2 did not take any step to redress the grievance of the complainant. The opposite party No.2 has taken up the defence that the withdrawal in favour of the complainant was successful, but the opposite party has failed to explain the contradiction in the record kept and maintained by it. It is clear from the CCTV footage that the withdrawal was not successful which has rendered the defence set up by the opposite party No.2 as false.
6. In view of the evidence discussed and findings recorded above, this Forum is bound to conclude that the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service due to which the complainant has suffered harassment, monetary loss and mental tension.
RELIEF:
In view of the findings recorded above, the complaint is allowed against opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.2 is directed to pay Rupees 10,000/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 12-03-2013 till the said amount is paid or realised. The opposite party No.2 is also directed to pay cost of the complaint which we assess at Rupees 5,000/-. Let certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost, as per rules. The file, after its registration and due completion be consigned to the records.
ANNOUNCED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT
ON THIS THE 12th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015
(B.R. Chandel )
President
(Th. Digvijay Singh) ( Sushma Sharma)
Member Member
