Date of filing: 30-07-2014
Date of Disposal: 22.01.2015
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ANANTAPUR.
PRESENT: - Kumari Y.H.Prameela Reddy, M.L., LL.B., President
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, B.A., B.L., Male Member
Smt. M.Sreelatha, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Thursday, the 22nd day of January, 2015
C.C.No.87/2014
Between:
K.Ashok Kumar,
S/o Narasimhappa,
Appajipeta Village,
Palyam Post,
Pamidi Mandal,
Ananthapuramu District. … Complainant.
Vs.
1. The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Pamidi.
2. The Chief Manager,
State Bank of India,
Ananthapuramu. …. Opposite Parties
This case coming on this day for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri P.Gopal Rao, Advocate for the complainant and Sri T.Viswanath, Advocate for the opposite parties 1 & 2 and after perusing the material papers on record and after hearing the arguments of both sides, the Forum delivered the following:
O R D E R
Sri S.Niranjan Babu, Male Member: - This complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties 1 & 2 claiming a sum of Rs.10,400/- towards un withdrawn amount from the ATM Centre, Rs.5000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards legal expenses.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that: - The complainant is the permanent resident of Appajipeta Village, Palyam Post, Pamidi Mandal, Anantapur District. The complainant is the S.B. Account holder bearing No.32799024809 in the branch of 1st opposite party Bank and also having ATM card bearing No.4591500071622852. The said ATM card was used by the complainant to withdraw the amount from his account for his needs. The complainant was having an amount of Rs.10,480/- to his credit as on 24.06.2013. On 24.06.2013 the complainant has visited SBI ATM centre I.D.No.S10A000806002 situated at Sai Nagar, Anantapur and tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,400/-, but no amount was dispensed by the machine. Then the complainant felt that there was no sufficient amount in the ATM centre and he went away. Subsequently the complainant enquired in the Bank about the amount in his account and came to know that the amount of Rs.10,400/- has been debited from his account. Immediately the complainant gave a complaint to the 2nd opposite party about debiting of the amount from his account. The 2nd opposite party sent a letter stating that the amount has been withdrawn from ATM centre on 24.06.2013.
3. The complainant further submits that it is the duty of the Bank to maintain the C.C. cameras in the ATM centers and every ATM centre is having data about the withdrawal amount from the ATM. But in the above said ATM centre there is no C.C. cameras and non-maintenance of C.C. cameras in ATM centre is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the same has caused loss and mental agony to the complainant. Further the complainant submits that he is a consumer of the opposite parties and he is entitled for the protection under Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The negligent attitude of the opposite parties has caused mental agony to the complainant and it is the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Further the complainant has undergone enormous mental agony due to the unfair trade practice of the opposite parties for which he is entitled to claim compensation from the opposite parties. The complainant has claimed a sum of Rs.10,400/- towards un-dispensed amount from the ATM, Rs.5000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards legal expenses.
4. The 1st opposite party filed counter stating that the complainant is put to strict proof of all allegations made in the complaint are denied by the 1st opposite party. The 1st opposite party submits that it is true that the complainant has proceeded to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,400/- on 24.06.2013 from SBI ATM centre near over bridge, New Town, Anantapur. The 1st opposite party submits that the allegation by the complainant that he has not received the above said cash of Rs.10,400/- from the said ATM on 24.06.2013 is totally false and the said allegation is only invented for the purpose of filing the unjust complaint to have unlawful gain from the opposite parties with a cheating attitude. The reason being that the complainant has not filed the ATM cash summary slip which shows the date of transaction TXN number and response code along with the complaint to the Hon’ble Forum to prove his bonafides.
5. Further the 1st opposite party submits that the allegation by the complainant that he gave a complaint on 17.07.2013 to the 2nd opposite party with regard to the above said ATM transactions is true for which the 2nd opposite party has gave a reply to the complainant on the same day i.e., on 17.07.2013 by stating that as per their EJ. report the above ATM transaction “is successful”. In support of their defense the opposite party has filed (1) office copy of said reply letter issued by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant (2) copy of statement of account dt.17.09.2014 of the complainant at SBI Pamidi Branch (3) copy of E.J. report dt.07.10.2014 obtained by ATM channel Manager of SBI R.B.O.-II Anantapur (4) copy of statement dt.13.11.2014 of ATM transactions done by the complainant from 04.06.2013 to 25.06.2013 are herewith filed for verification.
6. Further the allegation by the complainant that on the said date of ATM transaction done by him the C.C. camera was not working is totally false and without any valid proof. This opposite party submits that on the date of the above said ATM transaction i.e., on 24.06.2013 the C.C.camera in the said ATM centre was working properly. But the complainant has not requested this opposite party for the said photo images at any point of time except alleging the same in the present complaint for the first time. Further this opposite party submits that the said images can be obtained only within three months from the date of said transaction but not later. Hence, this opposite party is unable to file the said photo images of ATM transactions done on 24.06.2013 into this Hon’ble Forum.
7. As such this opposite party submits that there is no deficiency of service on their part at any stage of the above said ATM transactions and the present complaint has been filed against them by the complainant without any justifiable cause and to damage the good reputation of their Bank in general public to have unlawful gain. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1 & 2 the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.
8. The 2nd opposite party filed a memo adopting the counter of 1st opposite party.
9. i) Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite
parties 1 & 2?
ii) To what relief?
10. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the evidence on affidavit of the complainant has been filed and marked Ex.A1 to A5 documents. On behalf of the 1st opposite party, the 1st opposite party filed evidence on affidavit and marked Ex.B1 to B4 documents.
11. Heard both sides.
12. POINT:- The counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant is a S.B. Account holder in the 1st opposite party Bank and is also provided with an ATM Card bearing No.4591500071622852. The ATM Card being used by the complainant to withdraw the amount from the complainant’s S.B. Account. The counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant was having an amount of Rs.10,480/- in the complainant’s account as on 24.06.2013. On 24.06.2013 the complainant has visited SBI ATM Centre I.D.No.S10A000806002 situated at Sai Nagar, Anantapur and proceeded to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,400/- but no amount is received by the complainant. Then the complainant felt that there is no sufficient amount in the ATM centre and he went away. Subsequently the complainant enquired in the Bank about the amount in his account and came to know that an amount of Rs.10,400/- has been debited in the complainant’s account. The counsel for the complainant submitted that then the complainant given a complaint to the 2nd opposite party about the debiting of the amount from his account, the 2nd opposite party sent a letter stating that the amount has been withdrawn from ATM Centre on 24.06.2013.
13. The counsel for the complainant submitted that it is the duty of the Banks to maintain the CC Camera in the ATM centre and every ATM centre is having data about the withdrawal of amount from the ATM but whereas in the above said ATM centre there is no C.C. Camera and none maintenance of CC Camera in the ATM Centers shows their negligence and deficiency of service which has caused loss of money and mental agony to the complainant herein. The counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant is a consumer to the opposite parties and he is entitled for the protection under Consumer Protection Act,1986. Further the counsel for the complainant argued that the negligent attitude of the opposite parties has caused mental agony to the complainant and it is the deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties which has caused monitory loss and mental agony to the complainant for which the opposite parties are liable to pay compensation to the complainant.
14. The counsel for the opposite parties submitted that it is true that the complainant is an account holder in the 1st opposite party Bank and submitted that it is true that the complainant has proceeded to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,400/- from SBI ATM centre near over bridge new town, Anantapur. The counsel for the opposite party submitted that the allegation made by the complainant that he has not received the above said cash of Rs.10,400/- from the said ATM on 24.06.2013 is totally false and the said allegation is only invented for the purpose of filing the unjust complaint to have unlawful gain from the opposite parties with a cheating attitude. Further the counsel for the opposite party argued that the complainant has not filed the ATM cash summary slip which shows (1) The date of transaction (2) TXN Number (3) Response Code along with the complaint to show that the complainant has not received any amount and this shows the bonafides of the complainant. Further the counsel for the opposite party argued that the allegation made by the complainant that he gave a complaint on 17.07.2013 to the 2nd opposite party with regard to the above said ATM transaction is true and for which the 2nd opposite party has given a reply to the complainant on the same date i.e., 17.07.2013 by stating that as per their Electronic Journal Report the above said ATM transaction is successful. Further the counsel for the opposite parties argued that in support of his contention the opposite parties have filed 1) The date of transaction (2) TXN Number (3) Response Code which are marked as Ex.B1 to B4.
15. Further the counsel for the opposite parties argued that there is no truth in the allegation made by the complainant and on the said date of ATM transaction the C.C. camera was not working is totally false and without any valid proof. Further the counsel for the opposite parties argued that the C.C. camera was working as on the said date of transaction i.e., 24.06.2013 but as the complainant has not requested the opposite parties for the said photo image at any point of time except alleging the same in the present complaint for the first time. Further the counsel for the opposite parties argued that the said images can be obtained only within three months from the date of transaction but not latter. Hence the opposite parties are unable to file the said photo images before this Hon’ble Forum. The counsel for the opposite parties argued that Ex.B1 to B4 it clearly show that at no point of time the opposite parties have committed any deficiency of service to the complainant. And further the opposite parties argued that as the complainant has received a sum of Rs.10,400/- on 24.06.2013 from the ATM Centre the allegation that the complainant did not receive any amount from the ATM centre is a utter lie and hence there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. Further the counsel for the opposite parties argued that as the complainant has not filed any TXN slip to prove his contention which clearly shows that the complainant has filed this complaint against the opposite parties for unlawful gain. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.
16. After hearing the arguments of both sides and perusing the documents submitted by both sides it is an admitted fact that the complainant was having ATM card issued by the 1st opposite party and as on 24.06.2013 the complainant proceeded to SBI ATM centre near over bridge new town Anantapur is established beyond doubt by the opposite parties through their Ex.B3 document. The contention of the complainant that the ATM centre at Sai Nagar branch where the complainant has tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.10,400/- and the ATM did not dispense any amount is not proved by the complainant by filing any document like the TXN slip for that transaction. Further the opposite parties have filed Ex.B1 document which is the letter written to the complainant dt.17.07.2013 stating that the transaction dt.24.06.2013 was successful transaction as peer their Electronic Journal. Further the opposite parties has proved beyond doubt with regard to the transaction dt.24.06.2013 was a successful transaction as per Ex.B2, B3 & B4. The contention of the complainant cannot be considered because the complainant could not substantiate his version through any documentary proof like the transaction slip which is a necessary document to prove his case. Hence we are of the view that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and they are not liable to pay any amount to the complainant as claimed.
17. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in open Forum, this the 22nd day of January, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER, MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTHAPURAMU ANANTHAPURAMU ANANTHAPURAMU
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EVIDENCE ON CHIEF AFFIDAVITS
ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
PW1: K.Ashok Kumar complainant
ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOISITE PARTIES 1 & 2
RW1: Smt. A.Nagasudha, Manager, SBI, Pamidi Branch
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT
ExA1 Original Pass Book issued by the 1st opposite party in favour of the complainant.
Ex.A2 Office copy of the legal notice dt.23.09.2013 got issued by the complainant to the
opposite parties 1 & 2.
Ex.A3 Dt.17.07.2013 letter issued by the 2nd opposite party to the complainant
Ex.A4 Photo copy of ATM.
Ex.A5 ATM withdrawal statement dt.06.02.2013
EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES1 & 2
Ex.B1 Dt.17.07.2013 office copy reply letter issued by the 2nd opposite party to the
complainant
Ex.B2 Dt.17.09.2014 statement of account of the complainant at SBI Pamidi Branch.
ExB3 Dt.08.10.2014 copy of E.J. report obtained by ATM channel Manager of SBI
R.B.O.-II Anantapur.
Ex.B4 Dt.13.11.2014 statement of ATM transactions done by the complainant from
04.06.2013 to 25.06.2013
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER, MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM
ANANTHAPURAMU ANANTHAPURAMU ANANTHAPURAMU
