Haryana

Karnal

355/2012

Rajinder Kumar S/o Amar Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank Of Patiala - Opp.Party(s)

D.K.Sharma

27 Oct 2014

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.355 of 2012

                                                          Date of instt.24.07.2012

                                                          Date of decision:19.03.2015

 

Rajinder Kumar son of Shri Amar Singh resident of village Lalain P.O.Rahra tehsil Assandh  District  Karnal.

                                                                  ……..Complainant.

                   Vs.

 

State  Bank of Patiala Branch Assandh District Karnal, through its Branch Manager.

                                                                  …..Opposite Party.

 

                                      Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                                      Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.Subhash Goyal……..President.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma……Member.

 

 

 

Present:-       Sh.D.K.Sharma Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh.R.K.Sharma Advocate for the OP.

ORDER

 

                        The complainant has filed the present complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the OP alleging deficiency in services on the allegations that he was having saving account No. 00055067826500 with the  OP  and on 21.07.2010 the complainant was having balance of  Rs.90,733.66 in the said account and he  used ATM  at  12:37 and tried to withdraw Rs.20,000/- from the ATM Machine but the  amount could not be withdrawn  but a slip came out from the machine in which transaction of withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- was shown .  The complainant again at 12:38 used the ATM machine and tried to withdraw the amount of Rs.20,000/- and this time the transaction was successful.  Thus, the complainant made two transactions to withdraw the amount of Rs.20000/- each but the amount of Rs.20,000/- was received by the complainant  and entry for withdrawal of Rs.40,0000/- was made from the account of the complainant. The complainant  then approached the OP  and made written complaints vide C4 to Ex.C9 to the complainant and various  authorities and the officials OP assured the complainant to redress the grievance of the complainant but the officials of the Ops continued to postpone the matter on one pretext or the other and ultimately amount was not returned which tantamounts to deficiency in services.  The complainant has also tendered his affidavit in support of the averments made in the  complaint.

2.                The OP  filed its written statement raising the preliminary objections that the complaint was not maintainable and that the complainant has concealed the true and material facts while filing the present complaint.

 

                   On merits, it was contended that the complainant on 21.7.2010 used his ATM  at 12:37  and  again at 12:38 to withdraw an amount of Rs.20,000/- (each and both the transaction for withdrawal of total amount of Rs.40,000/- were successful. It was contended that there was no deficiency in services on the part of answering OP and dismissal of the complaint has been sought. Sh. Shiv Gogia Branch Manager of OP  has also tendered his affidavit in support of the contentions made in the written statement.

                  

3.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

4.                Therefore,  from the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence on the file and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it emerges that the  complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP alleging deficiency in services on the allegations that he was having saving account No. 00055067826500 with the  OP  and on 21.07.2010 the complainant used ATM Machine of OP  and tried to withdraw Rs.20,000/- from the ATM Machine but the  amount could not be withdrawn  but a slip came out from the machine in which transaction of withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- was shown . Again the complainant used the ATM for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/-   and this time the transaction was successful one. Thus, the complainant used the ATM two times for withdrawal of total amount of Rs.40,000/- but the amount of Rs.20,000/- were received by him and thus the deduction of Rs.40,000/- from his account was made wrongly.  The complainant on approached the OP  and made written complaints vide Ex.C4 to  Ex.C9 to the OP and various authorities  and the officials of OP  assured the complainant to redress the grievance of the complainant but the officials of the OP continued to postpone the matter on one pretext or the other and ultimately amount was not returned which tantamounts to deficiency in services. 

 

                   However, as per the contentions of the OP, the complainant used the ATM Machine on 21.07.2010 for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- (two times)   i.e. at 12:37 and at 12:38and the transaction was successful. Meaning thereby the complainant had withdrawn the aforesaid amount of Rs.40,000/- as shown in the J.P.Roll Ex.R2

 

                            

5.                Therefore, after going through the evidence and circumstances of the case, it is evident that  the complainant on 21.7.2010 at 12:37 used the ATM Machine of  OP for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- but the said amount was not  allegedly received. Though, the slip showing the transaction came out.  The said transaction dated 21.7.2010 has been reflected in the J.P.Log Ex.R2.  Again  the complainant used the ATM at 12:38 to withdraw the amount of Rs.20,000/- and the said transaction was also successful as per J.P.Log Ex.R2. Therefore, there is voluminous evidence on the file to show that the complainant used the ATM card for withdrawal of Rs.20,000/-, twice totaling Rs.40,000/-, from the ATM Machine of OP  and the said transaction was successful. 

 

6.                The argument that   no CC footage has been placed on the file by the Ops and as such the Ops concealed the material evidence and  thus  complaint was liable to be accepted is not sustainable in the eyes of law in view of the order passed by the Hon,ble State Commission   in the appeal  No.227 of 2013  decided on 23.5.2013  titled  Bank of India Versus Ashok Kumar.  In the said Judgment, the Hon, ble State

Commission has held as below:

 

                                                          “Even  otherwise, the ATM card remains with the possession of the complainant alongwith its secret number and nobody can withdraw any amount without secret code number.”

 

               Same view  has been taken by the  Hon,ble National Commission in case State Bank of India Vs.K.K.Bhalla in revision petition no. 3182 of 2008 (2011(2) RCR 292 (NC).

 

                       Same view  has been taken by the  Hon,ble National Commission in case State Bank of India Vs.K.K.Bhalla in revision petition no. 3182 of 2008 (2011(2) RCR 292 (NC).

 

                

          Reliance has also been placed on the law laid down  by the Hon’ble State Consumer  Disputes Redressal Commission , U.T.Chandigarh in case Shri Sarabjit Singh Lahri Versus PNB and another, 2003(1) CPC page 425.

 

7.                Therefore, in view of the law laid down  in the above referred authority and in view of the fact that Pin code is a secret and the ATM is also a very personal document of the customer and without using the secret pin code and the ATM card, the transaction cannot be completed. Therefore, as per J.P.Log report which has reflected  the transaction successful, it has to be held that the complainant used the ATM card by inserting secret pin code and thus the transaction was completed.  It is pertinent to mention that as per version of the complainant, he received the receipt of the transaction itself shows that the transaction was successful and there is no reason as to why the money was not received by the complainant.

                         It is pertinent to mention here that there is nothing on the file in order to infer that on the particular date the particular machine was not functioning properly.  There is no other complaint regarding irregular functioning of the said ATM machine. Therefore, when the J.P.Log has shown the transaction successful then in the absence of any contrary evidence on the file, it could not be assumed that the said amount was not withdrawn by the complainant and as such we hold that there was no deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

 

7.                Therefore, as a sequel to our above findings, we find no merit in the present complaint and the same is, therefore, dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated: 19.03.2015                                                                           

                                                              (Subhash Goyal)

                                                             President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.

 

 

Present:-       Sh.D.K.Sharma Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh.R.K.Sharma Advocate for the OP.

                  

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been dismissed. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated: 19.03.2015                                                                            

                                                              (Subhash Goyal)

                                                             President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.