JUDGEMENT By Sri. Pampapathi President:- This is a complaint filed by complainant Rudrappa K. Goni against the opposite Branch Manager State Bank of India, Raichur U/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act for to direct the opposites to pay an amount of Rs. 75,000/- with interest and cost. 2. The brief facts of the complainants case are that, he is the customer of Opposite Bank wherein he is having his Savings Bank Account No. 30144963792 and he is also ATM Card Holder vide No. 6220180462200040642. Further it is the case of the complainant that, the opposite Bank has unlawfully deducted an amount of Rs. 18,534/- on 31-12-09 from his account without giving any kind of notice or information regarding the deduction of the amount. The complainant has recently on 01-01-10 came to know the same and immediately intimated the same through letter dt. 04-01-10 and requested the opposite Bank to remit the above said unlawful debited amount of Rs. 18,534/-, but in reply the opposite Bank has given a false and untenable reasons by contending that, the complainant himself as withdrawn a sum of Rs. 15,000/- through ATM on 14-09-08. It is the case of the complainant that, at no point of time on that day he had withdrawn the said amount of Rs. 15,000/- but he has withdrawn only a sum of Rs. 2,000/- through ATM. The say of the bank regarding withdrawl of the amount on 14-09-08 to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- is false. The opposite Bank has debited Rs. 18,534/- from the account of the complainant on 31-12-09 is illegal and not correct. The contents of the reply letter written by opposite Bank to the complainant is false and baseless. The say of the bank regarding withdrawl of the amount of Rs. 15,000/- itself would goes to show that, there is a deficiency in service on the part of opposite Bank. For this illegal act the complainant has suffered with financial loss, mental agony, tension, pain and harassment, hence opposite bank has liable to pay the damages, compensation as prayed in the complaint. 3. The opposite Bank appeared in this case through its counsel, filed its written version by contending that, there was no negligence on the part of Bank, in order to make unlawful gain the complainant has field this false and baseless complaint. Generally the customer who is holding an ATM Card is assigned with a secret PIN No. which is even not known to the Bank while withdrawing the amount from the ATM system the card holder/customer should apply the card and command the secret PIN No. then only then machine/ATM system would activate and work and thereby the requisite money in the form of currency would release and the indication of the successful realization of the money is displayed in the system as 000 and it is an indication of proof regarding the money is taken away by the card holder himself only but none else. All these activities in the ATM cell will be recorded in the hidden camera. In the instant case, the card holder had no balance of Rs. 15,000/- in his account but on that particular day he has withdrawn the said amount. But as per the system of working of ATM facility the account holder is provided with an arrangement of over draft facility and accordingly the complainant is given with the over draft facility by the opposite bank at the relevant of withdrawl and subsequently the due is deducted from the account of the complainant towards the outstanding dues together with some penalty etc., due to non maintaining the requisite balance with the said account by the customer/complainant at the relevant time, there is no unlawful deduction made by the opposite bank out of the account of complainant. Further it is the case of the opposite Bank is that, the JP Log of the said transactions pertaining to the complainants account of the relevant time at Sl.No. S-1 AN 40045201 dt. 14-09-08 is self explanatory and which is the clearly proof regarding realization of the amount by the complainant himself from the ATM but none else. Though the amount was taken away by the complainant on 14-09-09 the amount is recovered from his account later on after a long period and solely with a view not to cause any inconvenience to the customer thereby he is benefited more rather than loss or inconvenience, but the complainant suppressed all these material facts, and approached the Forum with unclean hands. There is no any deficiency of service or negligence on the part of the opposite Bank as alleged by the complainant, accordingly it prayed for to dismiss the complaint among other grounds. 4. In-view of the pleadings of the parties. Now the points that arise for our consideration and determination are that: 1. Whether the complainant proves that, there is an illegal deduction of the amount of Rs. 18,534/- from his account by the opposite Bank on 31-12-09 as alleged.? 2. Whether complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed in his complaint.? 3. What order? 5. Our findings on the above points are as under:- (1) In Affirmative. (2) As discussed in the body of this judgement and as noted in the final order. (3) In-view of the findings on Point Nos. 1 & 2, we proceed to pass the final order for the following : REASONS POINT NO.1 :- 6. To prove the facts involved in these two points, affidavit-evidence of the complainant was filed, he was noted as PW-1. The documents Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-4 are marked. On the other hand affidavit-evidence of I/c. Branch Manager of opposite Bank was filed, he was noted as RW-1, and two documents Ex.R-1 & Ex.R-2 are marked. 7. On going through the pleadings of the parties and their respective evidences and documents, we are of the view that, the following point is undisputed point in between the parties:- 1. The complainant is the customer of opposite Bank and holding of the S.B. Account bearing No. 30144963792 and ATM Card bearing No. 6220180462200040642 etc., 8. The complainant in order to prove his case, he has produced (1) Pass Book which is marked at Ex.P-1, (2) The ATM Statement Slip which is marked at Ex.P-2, (3) The letter dt. 04-01-10 written to the Bank Manager of opposite Bank which is marked at Ex.P-3, (4) The letter written by Manager of opposite Bank to the complainant is marked at Ex.P-4. 9. Similarly the opposite Bank has produced two documents i.e, (1) Extract of JP Log marked at Ex.R-1 on the statement of account is marked at Ex.R-2. 10. It is the case of the complainant that, the opposite Bank has illegally withdrawn an amount of Rs. 18,534/- from his account on 31-12-09 without any proper information and prior notice. But it is the case of the opposite Bank is that, the complainant has withdrawn the amount of Rs. 15,000/- on 14-09-08 without keeping sufficient balance in his account and for that reason Rs. 18,534/- has been debited to the of the complainant. This amount includes the 15,000/- and other charges/penalties for non keeping the sufficient balance etc., 11. From the perusal of the Ex.P-1 Pass Book of the complainant it is very clear that, on 14-09-08 the complainant has withdrawn Rs. 2,000/- through his ATM Card No. 6220180462200040642 out of his total balance of Rs. 9,767/- and same has been debited to his account and after that the balance was remained in the account of the complainant to the tune of Rs. 7,767/-. Similarly we have also perused the Ex.R-2 the statement of account of the complainant produced by opposite Bank. In the said statement of account the same entries are also found on 14-09-08, but we do not find any withdrawal from the account of the complainant by using his ATM Card to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- as contended by the Opposite Bank. Similarly we do not find any entries to that effect in the Pass Book i.e, Ex.P-1 and in the statement of account i.e, Ex.R-2. It is worthwhile to note here that, other than the alleged withdrawal of amount of Rs. 15,000/- on 14-09-08 all other entries are available in the Ex.P-1 and as well as Ex.R-2. Further it is worthwhile to note here that, the Ex.R-2 and Ex.P-1 are the documents which are maintained by the Opposite Bank and they are the Extract taken out by their own system maintained in their bank. Under these circumstances, the say of the opposite bank regarding withdrawl of the amount by the complainant on 14-09-08 holds no water. 12. The opposite Bank in order to establish their case they are mainly depending upon the Ex.R-1 i.e, extract of JP Log. No doubt from the perusal of the Ex.R-1, it appears that, there was withdrawal of Rs. 15,000/- at about 8:12 from the account of the complainant and 000 was entered to ensure that, transaction was successful as contended by the opposite Bank in their written version. But there was no reason to believe that, same has been intimated to the complainant before deducting the amount of Rs. 18,534/- on 31-12-09 which includes Rs. 15,000/- withdrawn by the complainant on 14-09-08 and other charges for example non maintaining of proper balance etc., As per the opposite bank the amount has been withdrawn by the complainant on 14-09-08 and they have deducted Rs. 18534/- from the account of the complainant on 31-12-09, it means it is all, all most all after three months. All along these three months neither the Manager of the opposite Bank nor the officials who are maintaining the accounts intimated to the complainant regarding excess withdrawal of the amount on 14-09-08 and regarding deduction of the amount to the tune of Rs. 18534/- from the account of the complainant. When the complainant has raised his objection against the opposite through letter dt. 04-01-10 at Ex.P-3 regarding deducting the amount from his account, then only the opposite Bank trying to defend themselves through Ex.R-1 i.e, Extract of JP Log. This act of the opposite itself would goes to show that, there is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite Bank. 13. From perusal of the Ex.P-4 i.e, letter dt. 08-01-10 it appears that, the time limit for to settle the ATM disputes is only 12 days and further it appears that, the amount which has been withdrawn by the complainant on 14-09-08 is over draft amount, but when these things are known to opposite bank we do not know what was prevented to them to intimate the same earlier to 08-01-10 before writing the letter in reply to the letter dt. 04-01-10. From this it appears that, the bank was slept over the matter upto the letter received from the complainant and all of sudden raised their objections about the withdrawl of the amount by the complainant on 14-09-08 for that there was no proof/entries either in the Pass Book of the complainant nor in the statement of the account and asking for payment of charges and interest etc., this is also nothing but a negligence and deficiency on the part of the opposite bank. Hence we answered Point No-1 in affirmative. POINT NO.2:- 14. The complainant in his complaint has sought for direction against the opposite Bank to pay Rs. 18,534/- with accrued interest thereon and Rs. 55,000/- towards deficiency in service for causing financial loss, harassment, mental tension etc., and Rs. 1,466/- towards cost of this litigation. As we have noticed the deficiency in service on the part of opposite Bank and thereby complainant is entitled to recover a total sum of Rs. 18,534/- (which is deducted from the account of the complainant) with interest at the rate of 9% from the date of withdrawl of the same from the account of the complainant. As regards to the compensation is concerned, the claim of the complainant to the tune of Rs. 55,000/- is excessive and exorbitant one. Hence we feel it is just and proper to award Rs. 5,000/- in this regard. 15. The complainant is entitled to get lumpsum amount of Rs. 3,000/- towards deficiency in service and to get another amount of Rs. 1,500/- towards cost of this litigation. 16. The complainant is entitled to recover future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the total sum of Rs. 28,034/- from opposite Bank from the date of this complaint till realization of the full amount. Accordingly we answered Point Nos- 1 & 2. POINT NO.3:- 17. In view of our findings on Point Nos-1 & 2, we proceed to pass the following order: ORDER The complaint filed by the complainant is partly allowed with cost. The complainant is entitled to recover a total amount of Rs. 28,034/- which is rounded to Rs. 28,000/- from opposite Bank. The complainant is also entitled to recover future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the above total sum of Rs. 27,000/- from the date of the complaint till realization of the full amount. Opposite Bank is hereby by granted one month time to comply the above order from the date of this judgment for to make the payment. Intimate the parties accordingly. (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed, corrected and then pronounced in the open Forum on 31-08-10) Sd/- Sri. Pampapathi, President, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Sri. Gururaj, Member, District Forum-Raichur. Sd/- Smt.Pratibha Rani Hiremath, Member. District Forum-Raichur.
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
