Sri Debangshu Bhattacharjee, Member
This is a complaint U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.
One Sri Prodip Barman filed this case against the Central Bank of India, and Others Cooch Behar Branch (Hereinafter referred to as the OPs) alleging deficiency in services and others.
The complaint case, in brief, is as follows:
The petitioner is an account holder of the O.P. No.1 Bank and his S/B A/C No.3600610071.O.P. No.1 also issued ATM card NO.6521792515050044. That on 04.09.2018 at about 1.28 A.M. for urgent need of money petitioner went to the ATM counter of O.P. No.2 which was situated at Golokganj and pushed ATM Card for withdrawing of Rs. 5,000/-. But when the money was to come out the machine stopped functioning and no cash came out of it. But at that moment petitioner received a Mobile SMS intimating RS.5,000/- was debited from his account, though no cash was received by him. Subsequently petitioner informed the matter before the O.Ps and he was assured the disputed amount of Rs.5,000/- would be credited to his account within a short period.
On 09.10.2018 O.P. No.1 filed a complaint in connection with the Complainant’s complaint of cash not being received by him (Annexure-A). But it was said that the disputed transaction was a successful transaction. The complainant several times requested the O.P. No.1 to show the CC TV Footage and JP Log of ATM machine but till today OPs did not show CC TV Footage and JP Log before the petitioner. On 11.10.2018 petitioner filed a written complaint before the O.P. No.1 but till today O.P. No.1 did nothing for returning his money (Copy of written complaint dated 11.10.2018 Annexure- B).
Subsequently petitioner visited O.P. No.2 at Cooch Behar with a written complaint but O.P. No.2 did not receive the same and thereafter petitioner sent the written complaint dated 13.11.2018 through Reg. Post (written complaint copy dated 13.11.2018 Annexure-C and postal received Annexure- C & D).
It appears from the record that the OP No.1 and 2 have already received the notice on 19.01.19 and 28.01.19 respectively but they did not turn up before this Forum. Hence, the case was heard ex-parte against them.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the complainant a consumer u/s.2 (1)(d)(ii) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant case?
- Have the O.Ps any deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief/reliefs as they prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully, perused the documents of the Complainant and other materials on record and heard the ex-parte argument advanced by the agent of the complainant at a length. Perused also the Evidence on affidavit, written argument of the Complainant.
Point No.1.
Evidently, the Complainant is a bonafide customer of the O.P. No.1 having an S/B Account bearing No.3600610071.The Complainant for withdrawing money used the ATM of the O.P. No.2 i.e. he hired the service of the O.P. No.2 Bank. Thus, the relation between the O.Ps with the Complainant established from the record. Hence, the Complainant is the Consumer of the O.Ps.
Point No.2.
The Opposite Parties have their offices within this district and the complaint value of this case is far less than the prescribed limit. Thus, this Forum has territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to try the present case.
Point No.3 & 4.
Both the points are taken up together for convenience of discussion.
From the complaint as well as the evidence it is found that on 04.09.2018 the Complainant went to the ATM counter of the O.P. No. 2 for withdrawing Rs. 5,000/-. It is the case of the Complainant that he swiped his ATM card to withdraw Rs. 5,000/-. The said transaction was not successful and the Complainant received no amount. Thereafter by SMS on his mobile it was informed that the amount of Rs. 5,000/- had been debited from his account. The Complainant made contact with the O.Ps but all efforts were in vain.
It is also pertinent to mention that the Complainant on 11.10.2018 made a written complaint to the O.P. No.1 narrating the incident and he also sent another the complaint to O.P. No.2 on 13.11.2018. Thereafter, the O.P. No.1 was sitting idle for a long period for which the stipulated time has been expired. There is no lacuna on the part of the Complainant for such delay.
It is true that the PIN and the ATM card were in the custody of the Complainant. The Complainant by swearing an affidavit stated that he had not received Rs.5,000/- on 04.09.2018 from the ATM counter of the O.P. No.2 but the same amount was deducted from his account by the Bank, i.e. the O.P. No.1.
The problem allegedly faced by the Complainant may or may not occur but so far as his allegation is concerned, Complainant has to first show that the said amount of Rs.5,000/- was deducted from his Account though actually no such money was received by him from the said ATM counter at the relevant time.
Complainant, curiously enough, failed to produce his pass Book in respect of his Account from which he wanted to withdraw the amount. Even after hearing of argument, the non production of such document which is a vital one to support the contention of the Complainant, could be detected and the complaint was given more than sufficient opportunity to produce the said relevant Pass Book. But for reasons not Known to us, Complainant did not produce the same.
In such a situation, we are of the opinion that Complainant failed to discharge his primary duty to produce of all the relevant documents before the Forum for consideration of his complaint and that being so, the instant complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Hence, it is
Ordered,
That the complaint case be and the same is hereby dismissed ex-parte against both the O.Ps without any cost.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the concerned party by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action as per rule. The copy of the Final Order is also available at www.confonet.nic.in.
Dictated and corrected by me.
