Delhi

North East

CC/340/2017

Smt. Seema - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank Of India - Opp.Party(s)

29 Jul 2019

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM: NORTH-EAST

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

D.C. OFFICE COMPLEX, BUNKAR VIHAR, NAND NAGRI, DELHI-93

 

Complaint Case No. 340/17

 

In the matter of:

 

	Mrs. Seema W/o Shri Dev Raj Singh R/o H.No. C-1/42, Gali No. 1, Near B.D. Memorial Public School Saboli, Delhi 110093	Complainant
	Versus
1       2	State Bank of India Nand Nagri Delhi 110093   Canara bank 1372-73 Sultan Singh Building Luthiyan Road, Kashmere Gate Delhi 110006	Opposite Parties

 

DATE OF INSTITUTION:      JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:               DATE OF DECISION  :

18.12.2017 29.07.2019 29.07.2019

 

 

 

N.K. Sharma, President

Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

Order passed by Ms. Sonica Mehrotra, Member

 

 

ORDER

1. Brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is having a bank account no. 0389108034471 with OP2. On 25.09.2017 complainant sent her son Aman to withdraw money who used the nearby ATM of OP1 to withdraw Rs. 10,000/- but despite completion of all formalities of ATM neither money came out from ATM of OP1 nor any receipt. Till date no SMS has been received by complainant on her registered mobile phone for the withdrawal.  On 27.09.2017 while checking the balance of her account complainant found that Rs. 10,000/- has been deducted from her savings bank account with OP2 and now she is left with only Rs. 4,000/- out of total 14,000/- which were in her account before disputed  transaction of Rs. 10,000/- on 25.09.2017. Immediately complainant contacted OP2 who advised her that often due  to mechanical faults such glitches happen  and assured that the deducted money shall be returned in her saving account within 12-14 days. Complainant also updated her passbook wherein entry of withdrawal of Rs. 10,000/- on 25.09.2017 was reflecting. After that complainant wrote a request on 25.09.2017 to OP2 for getting CCTV footage from OP1 for which she was asked to bear expenditure of Rs. 2000-2500/- which complainant agreed to bear. Thereafter, complainant made police complaint dated 18.11.2017 to S.H.O., P.S. Harsh Vihar, Delhi complaint about non-reversal of the disputed/ wrongly deducted amount Rs. 10,000/- by OP2 and non  provision of CCTV footage but nothing came forth. Lastly, complainant vide complaint dated 12.12.2017 to Bank Manager, OP1 requested for early resolution of her problem but to no avail.   Therefore, complainant as a last resort filed the present complaint before this Forum praying for directing OPs to refund / remit back sum of Rs. 10,000/- in her account held with OP2 alongwith damages for mental agony against the OPs to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- towards the cost of litigation.
2. Notice was issued to OPs on 12.01.2018. However, despite service and receipt of copy of complainant by both OPs on 05.02.2018 and 25.01.2018 respectively, no further appearance or written statement came forth by any of the OPs due to which their right to file the same was closed vide order dated 06.04.2018 and the OPs were proceeded against Ex parte vide order dated 25.03.2019.
3. Complainant filed ex-parte evidence and written arguments on 06.07.2018 and 22.01.2019 respectively reiterating her grievance made in her complaint against the OPs.
4. We have heard the arguments addressed by the complainant and have carefully perused the case file and material documents placed on record therewith.

The debit of Rs. 10,000/- is clearly established from the passbook entry of the complainant of account held with OP2 and follow-ups with OP2. The complainant had made sincere efforts by way of lodging prompt complaint with OP2. OP2 cannot shirk its responsibility and duty towards its customer but it failed to place on record defence/ document by way of switch report, no excess cash certificate, JP Log / E- Journal which in such cases are mandatorily required and recognised/ admissible defence for the bank in such ATM transaction cases. No appearance was made by OP2 in the present case in sheer act of callousness and irresponsibility towards the complainant and disregard to this Forum. OP2 failed to put forth its defence and supporting documentary evidence in its defence.

In view of the allegation of complainant having gone unrebutted and on the basis of evidence placed on record, we are of the considered opinion that there is merit in the present complaint and we hold the OP2 bank guilty of deficiency of service and dereliction of duty, indifference shown and utter disregard shown to its customer and failure to redress her grievance in failure to initiate any enquiry at any level. As regards OP1, there is no privity of contract with complainant as per the law laid down in the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission in Chenaram Vs Oriental Bank of Commerce & Anr. II (2016) CPJ 613 (NC) in which the Hon’ble National Commission had held that since the complainant had no account with the bank of which the ATM accessed, she was not a consumer of that bank and had no privity of contract with it and therefore, was not entitled to approach the District Forum against the said bank by way of consumer complaint. Therefore, in view of the settled law, no relief to the complainant can be granted against OP1 in the present case.

5. We, therefore, find OP2 deficient in service in having failed to address the problem of the complainant. We, therefore, give complainant benefit of doubt in the absence of rebuttal by OP2 due to its non appearance in the matter and accordingly direct the OP2 to refund / remit the wrongful debit of Rs. 10,000/- back to the account of the complainant held with OP2.

We further award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards expense incurred by the complainant and for mental pain and agony and harassment suffered by the complainant all inclusive of litigation charges payable by OP2 to the complainant. Let the order be complied by both OPs within 30 days from the date of copy of receipt of this order.

6. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005.
7. File be consigned to record room. 
8. Announced on 29.07.2019.   

(N.K. Sharma)    President

(Sonica Mehrotra) Member