This complaint U/S 35 of C.P. Act, 2019 was initially filed against the Opposite Party (O.P.) 1) The Branch Manager, Punjab NationalBank,      Kadamtala Branch, Rachaita Kadamtala, Opposite to Rupmaya Cinema, P.S. - Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri, Pin Code- 735101 and Proforma O.P. 1) The Manager, Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd., At Golden Plaza, Upper Ground Floor, Shop No. - 3, Burdwan Road, P.O. & P.S. - Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling, Pin Code- 734001 and as per the Order No.- 08, dated 01/03/2023 the Proforma Opposite Party  No.1 was expunged and the O.P. No.1 declared ex-party in this case.             

The case of the complainant as per her complaint is as follows-

The complainant stated in his plaint that on 23/04/2012 he opened a Savings Bank Account being A/C No. 6074001500006988 in the bank of O.P. No.1 and in the said bank account a sum of Rs. 994/- (Rupees Nine Hundred and Ninety Four) only was seen as credited balance till that night and the next day, i.e., on 03/07/2022 at 9:03 a.m. the complainant transferred a sum of Rs. 1, 100/- (Rupees One Thousand and One Hundred) only through UPI and at 9:37 a.m. another sum of Rs. 700/- (Rupees Seven Hundred) only was also transferred to the said account through UPI by complainant’s mobile being no. 8016220968. The complainant also added that subsequently at the time of checking the balance of his said account he noticed that the remaining balance was nil or zero and there was no reflection of the previous balance of Rs. 994/- (Rupees Nine Hundred and Ninety Four) only in the statement of O.P. No.1 bank, even not shown in mobile phone, through P.N.B. e- pass book and also PHONEPE.

The complainant also stated in his plaint that the said incident of debit by O.P. No.1 bank could have been originate from EMI payment falling in the same day worth Rs. 2, 607/- (Rupees Two Thousand Six Hundred and Seven)

only to finance company of the complainant, i.e., Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. (Proforma O.P. No.1). The complainant also added that to make him sure and confirm he again checked the EMI status of the Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. (Proforma O.P. No.1) from where the complainant obtained a two wheeler loan and the same was reflected in loan transaction detail dated 03/07/2022 as insufficient fund, resulting in the deposited cheque of the complainant got bounced on two occasions and it came to his knowledge that no such amount on that day of 03/07/2022 was debited from the O.P. No1 bank to the said finance company.

The complainant also sated in his plaint that on 06/07/2022 he went to meet the manager of O.P. No.1 bank but instead of meeting the O.P. No.1 bank gave an another date, i.e., 11/07/2022 to meet the manager and on 11/07/2022 the complainant submitted a written complaint at the O.P. No.1 bank. The complainant also added that after that on 01/08/2022 met the manager of O.P. No.1 bank but did not get any result and then after getting no result from the O.P. No.1 bank, on 01/08/2022 the complainant lodged a written complaint at Kotwali P.S. and finally on 08/08/2022 the complainant sent a leagal notice to the O.P. No.1 bank which was received by the O.P. No.1 bank on 11/08/2022.        

 The prayers of the complainant are as follows-

1. Admit the petition.
2. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to supply the correct and actual Bank Statement of A/c No. 6074001500006988 of the complainant lying at the O.P. No.1 bank to make him understand about the debit amount, credit amount and adjustment since 02/07/2022 to till date.
3. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to supply or provide to the complainant cogent reason of showing the account balance in the A/c No. 6074001500006988 as zero or nil lying in the said account standing in the name of the complainant. 
4. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to pay the complainant the amount of Rs. 2, 744/- (Rupees Two Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Four) only which the complainant had deposited to the said A/c No. 6074001500006988 lying to the O.P. No.1 bank with prevailing interest thereof.
5. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to pay compensation to the complainant of Rs. 1, 00, 000/- (Rupee One Lac) only for unfair trade practice and deficiency in service adopted by the O.P. No.1.
6. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to pay compensation to the complainant of Rs. 50, 000/- (Rupee Fifty Thousand) only for mental pain, sufferings, harassment and financial loss sustained by the complainant by the O.P. No.1.
7. To pass an order directing the O.P. No.1 to pay Rs. 10, 000/- (Rupee Ten Thousand) only for litigation cost.
8. Any other relief/ reliefs.

         List of documents filed by the complainant:

1. Account Statement for the A/c No. 6074001500006988 of Punjab National Bank since 22/06/2022 to 07/07/2022.
2. Loan Account Statement of Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. dated 11/07/2022.
3. Coloured printout of Transaction related documents.
4. Photocopy of complaint to Kotwali P.S. by the complainant dated 01/08/2022.
5. Photocopy of letter dated 11/07/2022 issued by the complainant to the O.P. No.1.
6. Photocopy of legal notice dated 08/08/2022, issued by L. Advocate of the complainant to O.P. No.1.

             Regarding this instant case, as per the Order No.- 08, dated 01/03/2023 the Opposite Party (O.P.) 1) The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Kadamtala Branch, Rachaita Kadamtala, Opposite to Rupmaya Cinema, P.S. - Kotwali, P.O. & Dist. - Jalpaiguri, Pin Code- 735101 did not appear before this Commission and hence, the Commission declared the O.P. No.1 ex-parte. Also as per the Order No.- 08, dated 01/03/2023 and also as per the prayer of the complainant the Proforma O.P. 1) The Manager, Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd., At Golden Plaza, Upper Ground Floor, Shop No. - 3, Burdwan Road, P.O. & P.S. - Siliguri, Dist.- Darjeeling, Pin Code- 734001 was expunged from this case.

Having heard, the Ld. Advocate of the complainant and on perusal of the Complaint and documents filed by the complainant the following points are taken to be decided by this Commission.

Points for consideration

1) Whether the complainant is a consumer?

2) Whether the case is maintainable under the CP act 2019?

3) Whether this Commission has its jurisdiction to decide this case? 

4) Whether there is any deficiency in service in the part of the O.P. as alleged by the complainant?

5) Is the complainant is entitled to get any award and relief as prayed for? If so, what extent?

Decision with reason:-

            All the points are taken up together for consideration and decision.

Seen and perused the complaint petition filed by the complainant, supported by the affidavit, documents filed by the complainant. We are also heard argument of the complainant in full length.

In this case as per plaint, the complainant had opened a Savings Bank Account being A/C No. 6074001500006988 in the bank of O.P. No.1 and in the said bank account a sum of Rs. 994/- (Rupees Nine Hundred and Ninety Four) only was seen as credited balance till that night and the next day, i.e., on 03/07/2022 at 9:03 a.m. the complainant transferred a sum of Rs. 1, 100/- (Rupees One Thousand and One Hundred) only through UPI and  at 9:37 a.m. another sum of Rs. 700/- (Rupees Seven Hundred) only was also transferred to the said account through UPI by complainant’s mobile being no. 8016220968. Hence, this Commission holds that the complainant is a customer of the said

bank and so there is no doubt that the complainant is a very much consumer in this case.

The complainant resides in Jalpaiguri and the O.P. No.1 is also carrying his business in Jalpaiguri. Thus, there is no doubt that this Commission has its territorial jurisdiction to decide this case.

In this instant case, the complainant verbally prayed to expunge the Proforma O.P. No.1 and as per the Order No.- 08, dated 01/03/2023 the Commission allowed the prayer of the complainant and expunged the Proforma O.P. No.1 Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. So, it is not possible for the Commission to get details of the cheque from the Tata Capital Financial Services Ltd. Hence, it is not clear to the Commission that on which date the cheque was issued?, whether there was any signature mismatched in the said cheque or not?, whether there was any spelling error in the said cheque or not? etc.     

In this instant case, this Commission in his Order No. 15 and 17, dated 21/06/2023 and 14/08/2023 directed the complainant to file necessary documents, especially the bounced cheque because the said cheque is the main instrument in this case. Without verifying the said bounced cheque this Commission is not able to decide this case. Mearly submission of the complainant that the cheque was bounced for insufficient fund is not acceptable unless and until it was proved by the complainant by the way of evidence. The Commission cannot give his judgment on the basis of assumption. The Commission gives his judgment on the basis of scrutinizing all the papers and evidences filed by the parties. But, in this case, the complainant failed to file the dishonoured cheque. So, this Commission has no scope to verify for which reason the cheque was dishonoured by the O.P. No.1 bank. So, this Commission holds that the complainant failed to prove his case by not giving adequate and proper documents and evidence in support of his claim.        

Hence, it is therefore,

ORDERED

That the Consumer Case No. 95/2022 be and same is dismissed without contest against the O.P. No.1 (Punjab National Bank) without cost.

Let a copy of this judgment be given to the parties directly or through their representative Ld. Advocate for compliance free of cost.