BEFORE THE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ADDITIONAL BENCH, MANGALORE
Dated this the 28th January 2017
PRESENT
SRI VISHWESHWARA BHAT D : HON’BLE PRESIDENT
SRI T.C. RAJASHEKAR : HON’BLE MEMBER
ORDERS IN
C.C. No.73/2012
(Admitted on 17.2.2012)
Mr. V.S, Chandramohan,
S/o N. Shankunni Nair,
Aged years,
Residing of Pandeshwara,
Mangalore.
….. COMPLAINANT
(Advocate for the Complainant: Sri SRK)
VERSUS
The Branch Manager,
State Bank of Travancore,
Mangalore Branch,
Near Milagres Mansion,
Hampankatta, Mangalore.
….......OPPOSITE PARTY
(Advocate for the Opposite Party: Sri KBR)
ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT
SRI. VISHWESHWARA BHAT D:
I. 1. The above complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act by the complainant against opposite party alleging deficiency in service claiming certain reliefs.
The brief facts of the case are as under:
The complainant contends is a customer of opposite party and holding an account and an ATM card issued by opposite party. On 14.8.2011 he has withdrawn Rs.3000 by using his ATM at Bangalore ATM centers to sooner shock an amount of Rs.25,000/ is debited from his account and is credited from his account and it happened twice. On 2.10.2011 the complainant was to Bangalore and withdrawn Rs.3,000/ using ATM centre at Bangalore and on 22.10.2011 he had withdrawn Rs.10,000/ at Mangalore by using ATM he was shocked to note on 2.10.2011 an amount of Rs.20,000/ is debited from his account on noting this he lodged complaint on 26.10.2011 his wife gave a complaint to which opposite party should reply letter informing the matter was taken up with its ATM nodal office. There is illegal debit of Rs.20,000/ from complainant account and were not credited complainants despite reminders and notice. Hence seeks the reliefs claimed.
II. Opposite party filed written version admitting the transactions and also alleging in the respect of desire withdrawal of Rs.20,000/ it was withdrawn by using ATM with his secret PIN number without the PIN the ATM cannot be utilized the debiting and the crediting of Rs.25,000/. On 14.08.2011 complainant had withdrawn a sum of Rs.3,000/ using ATM card twice a sum of Rs.25,000/ was debited to the account of complainant on the same day and there was a matching credit of Rs.25,000/ to the account of the complaint and on verification of the records including the JP log system found that ATM card with PIN was used to make the transaction. The alleged transaction on 26.10.2011 a sum of Rs.20,000/ was withdrawn from an ATM belonging to SBI and same is the necessary party contending that there is no deficiency of service hence seeks dismissal.
2. In support of the above complainant Mr. V.S. Chandramohan filed affidavit evidence as CW1 and answered the interrogatories served on him and produced documents got marked at Ex.C1 to C8 as detailed in the annexure here below. On behalf of the opposite parties Mr. Dileep Kumar S (RW1) Branch Manager, State Bank of Travancore also filed affidavit evidence and answered the interrogatories served on him.
III. In view of the above said facts, the points for consideration in the case are:
- Whether the Complainant is a consumer and the dispute between the parties?
- If so, whether the Complainant is entitled for any of the reliefs claimed?
- What order?
The learned counsels for both sides filed notes of arguments. We have considered entire case file on record including evidence tendered by the parties and notes of argument of the parties. Our findings on the points are as under are as follows:
Point No. (i): Affirmative
Point No. (ii): Negative
Point No. (iii): As per the final order.
REASONS
IV. POINTS No. (i): The complainant holding an SB A/c as well as an ATM issued by opposite party in his bank is not disputed by opposite party. On 2.10.2011 a sum of Rs.20,000/ was debited to the account of complainant as an ATM withdrawal and complainant claims it has an unauthorized debiting and when complainant approached opposite party he did not credit the amount to the credit back the amount to complainant’s account is not in dispute. However the debit of Rs.20,000/ as withdrawn by ATM claimed by complainant as unauthorized was not reversed back by the opposite party bank on the ground it was withdrawn by using ATM card with PIN and as such authorized withdrawal. Hence there is a dispute between complainant the customer the opposite party the service provider as defined under section 2(1)(e) of the C P Act. Hence we answer Point No.1 in the affirmative.
POINTS NO (ii): Even according to complainant soon after coming to know about the debiting of Rs.20,000/ to his account on 2.10.2011 he was not lodged a complaint. Even according to complainant though he came to know about the withdrawal on 22.10.2011 though the amount was withdraw on 22.10.2011 itself the complaint was lodged to opposite party only on 26.10.2011 admittedly by complainant’s wife. Ex.C2 is an intimation given by opposite party to complainant date 26.10.2011 mentions that the said transaction of Rs.20,000/ mentioning complaint dated 26.10.2011 i.e. as per Ex.C2 is a successful transaction and the journal record copy produced indicates successful transaction on 2.10.2011 on 14.14hrs at City Railway Station Terminal. Ex.C3 is another intimation give to complainant by opposite party that the late date 16.11.2011 if the transaction was not an authorised and if it is a fraud case and immediately arrange to block the card and the complainant had to lodge complaint to police by blocking the ATM card. But evidently the complainant had neither blocked the ATM card nor lodged any complaint to the jurisdictional police.
2. The complainant wanted us to believe that on 14.8.2011 there were two accidental entries showing debit of Rs.25,000/ each from the AB Account of complainant and which were admittedly reversed. However merely due to an earlier occurred error, as explained by opposite party, the accidental entry of withdrawal and then reversing is not justification to claim another of Rs.20,000/ withdrawn is also an unauthorised act here are not document produced by complainant to establish the withdrawal of Rs.20,000/ on 2.12.2011 through ATM counter SBM at Bangalore Railway Station in fact the complainant himself admitted on 2.10.2011 he was at Bangalore. The complainant has not produced any document to establish as to than ATM machine the withdrawal of Rs.20,000/ on 2.10.2011 at Bangalore was done.
3. Admittedly the complainant did not lodge any complaint against such unauthorized withdrawal of Rs.20,000/ from his account, he has also not mentioned he blocked his ATM card and he continued to use the same ATM card as pointed out by opposite party. Even in complainant’s own answer to the interrogatories of opposite party to question No.13 he mentions that he had not lodged any complaint against SBI regarding the alleged irregularity. Hence we are of the view that the complainant failed to establish deficiency in service on the part of opposite party in not debiting the amount withdrawn on 2.10.2011 from the account of complainant through ATM at Bangalore. Hence we answer Point No.2 in the negative.
POINTS No. (iii): Wherefore the following order
ORDER
The complaint is dismissed.
Copy of this order as per statutory requirements, be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.
(Page No.1 to 6 directly dictated by President to computer system to the Stenographer typed by her, revised and pronounced in the open court on this the 28th January 2017)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
(SRI T.C. RAJASHEKAR) (SRI VISHWESHWARA BHAT D)
D.K. District Consumer Forum D.K. District Consumer Forum
Additional Bench, Mangalore Additional Bench, Mangalore
ANNEXURE
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Complainant:
CW1 Mr. V.S. Chandramohan
Documents marked on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.C1:26.10.2011: Copy of the complaint given by the wife of the complainant
Ex.C2: 16.11.2011: Reply given by the opposite party along with the Journal Record
Ex.C3: 01.12.2011: Letter written by the opposite party to the complainant
Ex.C4: 02.12.2011: Letter written by the opposite party to the complainant
Ex.C5: 15.12.2011: Letter written by the opposite party to the complainant
Ex.C6: 22.12.2011: Postal Acknowledgement
Ex.C7: 26.12.2011: Copy of the Reply notice
Ex.C8: 14.01.2012: Copy of the Rejoinder notice
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party:
RW1 Mr. Dileep Kumar S, Branch Manager, State Bank of Travancore
Documents marked on behalf of the Opposite Party:
Nil
Dated: 28.01.2017 PRESIDENT
