Order-23.
Date-19/06/2015.
This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
Complainant by filing this complaint has submitted that he has his Savings Bank Account No.20810633921 along with Allahabad Bank, Cossipore Branch and in respect of the said account complainant has his one ATM card being no.4213371115503054 and his residence is at Cossipore, Kolkata.
It is the specific case of the complainant that on 27-04-2012 at 18:30 hours using his ATM card he tried to withdraw the sum from ATM at Punjab National Bank, Purbanchal University campus but said transaction was not successful. No payment was made as the transaction was unsuccessful and even no information slip was allowed in respect of the transaction.
Considering that mishap he again followed the operation of the said ATM to check the balance whether available balance was intact or not but in his utter surprise against 2nd time attempt the said ATM having ATM ID No.D1453900 vide transaction No.7892 dated 27-04-2012 at about 18:39 hrs.provided the balance in the referred account for Rs.1,048/- wherefrom complainant came to learn that an amount of Rs.10,000/- has been debited from his account illegally because he intended to withdraw said amount but that was unsuccessful and transaction was not matured and suspecting that complainant on his return to Kolkata lodged a complaint to Allahabad Bank, Cossipore Branch vide a letter dated 05-05-2012 for redressal but OP did not take any step for which the complaint is filed.
On the other hand, OP by filing written statement submitted that in fact, complaint is not maintable in view of the fact that entire transaction was made outside of West Bengal and ATM machine was of Punjab National Bank, Purbanchal Biswa-Vidyalaya, Danpur U.P. Branch where complainant operated the ATM machine as admitted and no part of transaction was made within the jurisdiction of West Bengal and complainant never used any ATM of Allahabad Bank and fact remains that entire cause of action arose within the state of U.P. not of West Bengal but fact remains complainant also filed an application to Ombudsman and Ombudsman authority called for all documents from PNB and after examining the documents and footage was pleased to come to a conclusion that no laches or irregularities was done by the Allahabad Bank and PNB any manner as such the prayer was rejected and complainant was dissatisfied with the said order and submitted complaint to CA&FBP and that was also disposed of and so this complaint was filed before this Forum.
It is further submitted that entire allegation is against ATM machine of the Punjab National Bank, but no doubt account is with the OP, his allegation is against the ATM machine and after operation of the ATM his activities was noted by the said ATM and result of transaction was only transmitted to account so the entire complaint is false and fabricated at the same time it is not maintainable so the complaint should be dismissed.
Decision with Reasons
On proper application of mind in respect of the allegation of the complainant and the version of the OP it it appears that undisputed rather admitted fact that complainant is a customer of OP Bank having a savings bank account being No.2081633291 and against that complainant holds an ATM card being No.4213371115503054.
On proper evaluation of the evidence and materials of the complainant it is found that complainant admittedly used the ATM machine being ATM ID No.D143900 on 27-04-2012 of Punjab National Bank, Purbanchal University within the state of U.P. not in West Bengal. Though fact remains that the ATM card was issued by his banker Allahabad Bank and cause of action arose on 27-04-2012 at UP not at West Bengal when that is the fact then as per provision of Section 11(c) of the C.P. Act we are confirmed that complainant must have to prove that any part of cause of action arose within West Bengal. But complainant himself admitted that he operated the machine of Punjab National Bank within U.P. at Purbanchal University Campus but he did not operate any ATM machine within the West Bengal then as per provision of Section 11(c) it is found that no part of cause of action arose within West Bengal but it arose within U.P. state.
In many cases many Fora are interpreting u/s.11(a) and 11(b) separately without ascertaining the cause of action and fact remains first it shall be decided whether cause of action arose within the State of West Bengal or within the districts of West Bengal. Thereafter, the provision of Section 11(a), (b) and (c) shall be applied but unfortunately without stating the provision in all the case it is found in casual manner it is read by the Fora when the address of the OP is within the West Bengal Area then it is within jurisdiction but that is a wrong interpretation of the provision of Section11(a) and (b). Fact remains Provision of Section 11(a) and (b) shall come after ascertaining cause of action if cause of action is not arisen within West Bengal there is no question of deciding the provision of Section 11(a) but it is again and again misrepresented by all Fora and that cause complication for want of studying interpret of statute which is a very compulsory book but same is never found in any library of any Fora at the same time the law of interpretation of statute is very complicated and it should be read on the ground how to interpret a provision but from the Section 11 it is clear that there are two parts that is first the valuation of the complaint shall not exceed Rs.20 lakhs thereafter the cause of action and without ascertaining cause of action the Fora cannot decide whether there is jurisdiction and when the jurisdiction of the Fora is not there then there is no question to decide the consumer dispute and in all the cases jurisdiction is a vital point because if any judgment is passed by any Fora having no jurisdiction it is void ab initio and it is not legal for implementation in the eye of law and even if any judgment is passed by any Fora having no jurisdiction, in execution case it shall stand rejected for want of jurisdiction.
Considering all the above facts principle of law and when the present cause of action arose at U.P. this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide even if complainant is a customer of Allahabad Bank, Cossipore and ATM Card was issued by Cossipore Branch no doubt but entire operation with the help of ATM card was made by the complainant in the ATM of Punjab National Bank, Purbanchal University Campus within U.P. then entire transaction was made at U.P. and if there is any grievance of the complainant in that case complainant ought to have filed such complaint before proper Forum who has jurisdiction to decide the same and actually the cause of action arose within U.P. State sp this Forum has no jurisdiction.
No doubt the deduction of amount was made from his amount but it has already been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court due to present internet banking system anyone can use debit card or ATM in any machine all over India and if complainant is found deceived after using that ATM or debit card in that case transaction point shall be the place where such ATM machine has been used for using debit card or ATM card of the bank by the customer but nowhere the bank account is lying.
Apparently we have gathered that practically no part of cause of action arose within West Bengal.
Further fact that from the pass book of the complainant issued by the OP it is found that Rs.10,000/- has been deducted but it is due to the act verdict of the complainant for using the ATM at U.P. and as per internet banking system that result is automatically switched over to the computer of the OP and OP placed the pass book for reprinting and handed over it so there is no negligence or deficiency on the part of the OP Allahabad Bank in this case if there is any negligence, deficiency that is on the part of the Punjab National Bank. Peculiar fact is that complainant has stated that machine did not respond, machine did not process even after placing pin code and ATM card but there is no allegation that the machine was defective at the certain point. For the sake of the argument it is accepted that the machine was defective then cause of action arose there. It should be kept in our mind to ascertain cause of action act of a man or act of any machine in the present system is vital because previously due to human error in bank pass book etc. many errors were detected that was rectified by the human when the banking internet system is implemented it is generally known to all that it is the activities of a monitor and server through internet system and if it is found that if there is any system failure for which a person is deceived in that case machine of a particular bank which is used by the customer is liable but all the factors are not always considered and in any casual manner the complaint is being dismissed or it is being allowed. Without any reasoning, scientific clarification, not even by application of any scientific method for the purpose of internet banking system we have gathered that day to day systems are being developed in respect of internet banking system about operation of ATM debit card and others. So, Fora must be knowledgeable about the systems otherwise a cryptic judgment passed by the Fora shall not serve the purpose of the consumer. Dedication is required like a student to know the actual happening by a particular case with scientific knowledge and view. Only by cramming some lines from the act it would not be possible to interpret it but daily reading of the line after handling other law books it shall be learnt how to interpret a section how to interpret the word and what is the intention of the legislation of but all these are closed chapters of Fora all through for which judgment is being passed by Fora with such findings there is ATM card in the hand of any of the customer and pin code is within the knowledge of the customer then that have been used by the customer, so, there is no negligence but that is not the scientific theorization that can be proved from the fact many persons after placing their car under lock and key but after return finds that the car is stolen then invariably Fora shall pass the judgment when keys are in your pocket there is no theft. Considering all the above facts and circumstances, we find that all the cases cannot be handled very casually. Particularly the cases regarding ATM debit card etc. should be handled after studying several books in this regard the hacking process hacking management and how to operate this devices, hack the ATMs for which huge books should be read and for that some training is also required but we are sure by training no member even President cannot realize how it can be done. So, computer system and devices knowledge are required and it is a very vital chapter to protect such sort of machine and to introduce anti-devices. In West Bengal in all the ATM machines there is no anti-devices for which many persons are being deceived but all judgements are being passed relying upon such observation as already published in some ruling books that customer is in custody the ATM card and pin code in his knowledge so, it is successful transaction. In this regard one very beautiful tit bits are there among the pundits that some pundits taught in a class having 30 students who secured above 90 percent marks but that pundits when put some questions only three or four persons answered perfectly and remaining students having 90 percent were sitting like dumb. Thereafter the pandit held an enquiry and found that at the time of examination this four boys alongwith other were in the same class and other 24 students managed to copy the said four students’ answer-scripts and all of them became pandit having no knowledge. This authorization is applied only on the ground that what is the position of the Fora if we do not read daily particularly the case record along with the law books it is impossible to give a verdict with proper knowledge and with such proper relief to the person. So, the casual approach is often taken by all the Fora and question of handling book is now a matter of gossip.
Whatever it may be considering all the above facts and on interpreting the provision of Section 11 with the facts as disclosed in the complaint we are confirmed no part of cause of action arose in this case within West Bengal so, this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide for which this complaint fails.
Hence,
Ordered
That the case be and the same is dismissed against the OPs on the ground that this complaint is barred u/s.11(c) of C.P. Act, but complainant may file such fresh application before the competent authority/forum with a prayer for by filing this judgment before that authority.
