BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 553 of 2010 | Date of Institution | : | 08.09.2010 | Date of Decision | : | 21.06.2011 |
Shri Ram Kishore Singh, c/o Gem Furnitures, SCO No. 30, Sector 7-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh. …..Complainant V E R S U S 1] State Bank of India, Madhya Marg, Sector 7-C, Chandigarh through its Branch Manager. 2] State Bank of India, Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh, through its Branch Manager. ……Opposite Parties CORAM: SH.P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER Argued by: Sh.Pradeep Sharma, counsel for complainant Sh.K.B.Singh, counsel for OPs. ---- PER P.D. GOEL, PRESIDENT Briefly Stated, the complainant has been maintaining SBI saving a/c No. 10506671539 with OP No.1 at Sector 7-C, Branch and also using ATM of the said bank. It is averred that the complainant used the ATM card of OP-1 thrice for withdrawal of Rs.5000/- Pratapgarh, U.P., with the ATM machine of OP No.2 but neither any amount was remitted nor any receipt was printed by the ATM Machine. When, the complainant got a print of mini statement from the ATM machine, surprisingly withdrawal of 15,000/- was shown with balance of Rs.298/-. The complainant with his grievances firstly approached to OP No.2 and thereafter filed a complaint dated 8.7.2009 with OP No.1 at Chandigarh for refund of the said amount. The OP No.1 forwarded the said complaint to OP No.2 and in reply the OP No.2 stated that transaction in question was successful, so it is unable to make any payment. Hence this complaint. 2. In their joint reply admitting the factual matrix of the case, the OPs submitted that ATM cards are issued with secret code to the account holders without which, it cannot be operated. OPs further contended that the ATM card in question has been used by the complainant himself in terms of the details of the JP Logs carrying timings & other details of its usages. So the transaction was successful. All other allegations of the complaint has been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 3. Parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record. 5. Admittedly, the complainant has been maintaining the SBI saving bank account with OP-1 at Sector 7-C, Branch Chandigarh and also using the ATM of the said Bank. The allegations of the complainant is that he used the ATM Card of OP-1 for withdrawal of Rs.5000/- but neither any amount was remitted nor any receipt was issued by the ATM machine. However, the withdrawal of Rs.15000/- was shown in his account with balance of Rs.298/-. The OPs-Bank raised the plea that the transaction in question was successful, therefore, the entry with regard to withdrawal of Rs.15000/- was shown in the account of the complainant is legal and valid. 6. To succeed in the complaint, it is upon the complainant to prove the averments made in the complaint and also to prove his allegations that the attempt made by him for withdrawal of Rs.5000/- was not successful. It appears that the complainant has not placed on record sufficient evidence to prove the said allegations contained in the complaint. 7. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the complainant made a reference to the para 3 of the reply on merits, wherein, it has been stated that the complainant has used the facility of ATM intalled at Railway Station, Partapgarh on 29.06.2010 at 8.25 with unable transaction and accordingly, the slip carrying remarks “sorry unable to process”. However using of ATM on the same day at 9.55 was quite successful for withdrawal of Rs.15000/-. Learned counsel for the complainant made a reference to the J.P. log produced by the complainant himself as part of Annexure C-3, wherein, it has been recorded that on 29.06.2009 at 7.55 a.m., the amount of Rs.15000/- was withdrawn. It was argued that in the said J.P.log, the time has been recorded as 7:55, whereas in reply to para No.3 on merits, the OPs have stated that the complainant made a attempt at 9.55 at Partapgarh for the withdrawal of Rs.15000/-. Learned counsel for the OPs stated that vide para No.3 of the reply referred to above, the recording of time as 9.55 in place of 7.55 is only a typographical mistake. 8. We are in agreement with the learned counsel for the OPs that vide para No.3 of the reply on merits referred to above, the time 9.55 has been recorded wrongly in place of 7.55 and it is only a typographical mistake as in the most important document i.e. J.P. log, the time has been recorded as 7.55. It is also clear from the J.P. log that on 29.06.2009, the amount of Rs.15000/- has been withdrawn from the account of the complainant. 9. Now it is proved on record that on 29.06.2009, the amount of Rs.15000/- has been withdrawn by the complainant. The entry contained in the J.P. log has also gone unrebutted and un-controvered. More so the J.P. log is most authentic document to prove the withdrawal from the ATM machine. Reliance placed on the case titled as Partap Singh Mehra Vs. Branch Manager, SBI decided on 22.07.2010 by our own Hon'ble State Commission in the appeal case No.69/2010. Consequently, it is held that the complainant has failed to prove that the attempt made by him for withdrawal of Rs.15000/- remained unsuccessful. 10. As a result of the above findings, this complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as costs. The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned. | | Sd/- | Sd/- | | | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | [P.D.Goel] | | | Member | President |
mp
| | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER | HONABLE MR. P. D. Goel, PRESIDENT | , | | 
