BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no.46 of 2012
Date of Institution : 6.3.2012
Date of Decision : 1.6.2016
Jagdish Chander, E.A.S.I. 1435/C, Police Station, Ding, Distt. Sirsa, r/o village Badopal, distt. Fatehabad.
……Complainant.
Versus
- State Bank of Patiala, Sirsa Branch, District Sirsa through its Branch Manager.
- State Banka of Patiala, Head Office, The Mall, near Shera Gate, Patiala, Distt. Patiala (Pb.) through its General Manager.
…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA…………………PRESIDENT
SH.RAJIV MEHTA……….. ……MEMBER.
Present: Sh.P.K.Berwal, Advocate for complainant.
Sh.M.S.Sethi, Advocate for the opposite parties.
ORDER
Case of complainant, in brief is that he was having his Saving Bank account bearing no.65011899477 with opposite party no.1. He was also issued an ATM card No.6038455035700024136 on the said account. On 16.12.2011, the complainant had withdrawn Rs.500/- from his said account through said ATM card and Rs.67439/- remained balance in his account. On 21.12.2011, he again withdrew Rs.1000/- but then he was surprised to receive the transaction slip showing Rs.21958.88P as balance in his account. The complainant enquired about the excess amount from Fatehabad Branch Office and its officials by checking his account told that the complainant has made some purchases ( which are mentioned in para no.2 of the complaint), through the ATM, rather the same were never made by him. Thus, the Ops have failed to protect the account of the complainant and he has suffered loss of Rs.54047.38P. Hence, the present complaint.
2. The bank i.e. the opposite parties, filed their reply by pleading that while issuing the ATM card, the complainant was also given a secret password for operating the ATM, but he leaked his secret password to his family members, relatives and friends and they have misused the same. The transactions worth Rs.18264/- and worth Rs.3,299/- as mentioned in para no.2(i) and 2(ii) of the reply were made at Bangalore and the same were undertaken by one Pawan Kumar. There were some other transactions through the said ATM. So, the complainant himself is negligent in using his ATM and prayed for dismissal of complaint.
3. In order to make out his case, the complainant has placed on record the documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4, whereas, opposite parties have placed on record the documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R8.
4. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. It is admitted fact that the complainant was having his saving bank account with ops and he is ATM card holder of opposite party no.1. The grievance of the complainant is that he made only two transactions i.e. on 16.12.2011 and 21.12.2011 worth Rs.500/- and 1000/- respectively. But in his account, very less amount has been shown as balance, which is wrong and improper. He has suffered loss of Rs.54057/- due to act and conduct of the opposite parties. To falsify his said contention, the opposite parties have placed on record the documents Ex.R2 and Ex.R3, which shows that through the said ATM card some purchases were made by the complainant through Myntra.com and Blue Dar.DHL on dated 2.7.2012. As per Ex.R8, many purchases were made on 17.12.2011, 20.12.2011, 21.12.2011 and 22.12.2011 respectively through the said ATM card. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
7. It is, thus, very clear that the complainant has totally failed to prove his case and any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Resultantly, this complaint is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced. President,
Dated: District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
Member.
