Haryana

Karnal

CC/390/2019

Rohit Kakkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

The AXIS Bank Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Gurdyal Singh Kadyan

02 Mar 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                       Complaint No. 390 of 2019

                                                        Date of instt.03.07.2019

                                                        Date of Decision:02.03.2022

 

Rohit Kakkar son of Shri Prem Kumar Kakkar, resident of house no.720, Sector-13, Urban Estate, Karnal. Aadhar no.5280 2413 1129.

 

                                               …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1.     The AXIS Bank Ltd. Mall Road, Karnal through its Manager.

 

2.     HDFC Bank Ltd. 5^th floor, plot no.1, Ansal’s Classique Tower, Rajouri Garden, Delhi-110027, near block Community Centre through its Manager/Divisional Manager.

 

3.     HDFC Bank Card Division and Lattice Bridge Road, Thiruvanmiyaur, Chennai-6000041 through its Chief Manager/Divisional Manager etc.

                                                                      …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

          

 Argued by: Shri Sohan Lal Kadiyan, counsel for complainant.

Shri Deepak Saini, counsel for opposite party no.1 (defence struck off)

Opposite parties no.2 and 3 exparte.

 

                    (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that complainant transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- through net banking bearing transaction reference no.NUT16422314996 dated 25.06.2018 at 11:30:45 for credit card no.4854980602406292 which is in the name of Shri Himanshu Sadana having its credit card in the bank of OP no.2. At the time of making the transfer through net banking, the complainant inadvertently clicked credit card no.4854980602409262 instead of above credit card no. 4854980602406292. OP no.1 debited the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the account no.912010024155949 which is maintained by the complainant in the bank of OP no.1. The complainant enquired about the transfer of the abovesaid amount from Himanshu Sadana and it was revealed that Rs.1,00,000/- have not been credited in the card no. 4854980602406292. The complainant as well as Himanshu Sadana approached the OP no.2 to re-credit the abovesaid amount from credit card no. 4854980602409262 to credit card no. 4854980602406292 or to transfer the amount in the account of the complainant bearing no.912010024155949. OPs assured the complainant to re-credit the abovesaid amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in the account of complainant. The complainant also moved an application in this regard to OP no.1 as well as Cardholder Dispute Form which was duly received by OP no.1. All the OPs have been requesting time and again to rectify this mistake by way of transferring the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in account no. 912010024155949. Lastly, on 15.09.2018, complainant went to the OPs and requested them to transfer the abovesaid amount in his account but OPs have flatly refused to transfer the said amount. Then complainant sent a legal notice in this regard to OPs but it also did not yield any result. In this way there was deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

2.             On notice, OP no.1 appeared but did not file any written version after availing several opportunities including two last opportunities. Hence, the defence of OP no.1 was struck off, vide order of this Commission dated 17.12.2019.

3.             OPs no.2 and 3 did not appear and proceeded against exparte, vide order dated 30.10.2019.

4.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A,  copy of Aadhar card Ex.C1, copy of legal notice dated 20.09.2018 Ex.C2, postal receipts Ex.C3 and Ex.C4, application dated 25.06.2018 regarding request to credit the payment Ex.C5, transaction acknowledgement mark-A, statement of account mark-B and closed the evidence on 12.02.2020 by suffering separate statement.

4.             On the other hand, OP no.1 has tendered into evidence affidavit of Vikas Goel Branch Manager Ex.OPW1/A and closed the evidence on 02.12.2021 by suffering separate statement.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

6.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the content of the complaint, has vehemently argued that complainant is consumer of OP no.1 bank and having bank account no. 912010024155949. He further argued that complainant transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- through net banking bearing transaction reference no.NUT16422314996 dated 25.06.2018 at 11:30:45 for credit card no.4854980602406292 which is in the name of Shri Himanshu Sadana having its credit card in the bank of OP no.2. At the time of making the transfer through net banking, the complainant inadvertently clicked credit card no.4854980602409262 instead of  credit card no. 4854980602406292. Thereafter, complainant visited the OPs so many times for re-credit the abovesaid amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in the account of complainant but OPs failed to do so. Hence, prayed for allowing the complaint.

7.             It is pertinent to mention here that, the defence of OP no.1 was struck off by this Commission, vide order dated 17.12.2019 and OPs no.2 and 3 were proceeded against exparte, vide order dated 30.10.2019. OP no.1 filed his affidavit Ex.OPW1/A but same cannot be considered as the defence of the OP n.2 has allegedly struck off.

8.             As per the version of the complainant, on 25.06.2018 he had transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- through net banking  in the name of Shri Himanshu Sadana having its credit card in the bank of OP no.2. It is admitted by the complainant that inadvertently  he clicked credit card no.4854980602409262 instead of credit card no. 4854980602406292. In the present case, complainant himself was on fault and he cannot blame to OPs for his own wrong act.  Furthermore, to prove his case whether the alleged amount had transferred in the account of Himanshu Sadana or not, complainant neither examined Mr. Himanshu Sadana nor his affidavit has placed on record. The onus to prove the same was lies upon the complainant but complainant has miserably failed to prove his case by leading cogent and convincing evidence. Hence, in view of the above discussion, we found no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs and present complaint deserves to be dismissed.

9.             In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed. Party concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and file be consigned to the record room.

Announced
Dated: 02.03.2022

President, 

District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Karnal.

                      (Vineet Kaushik)                      

                          Member