West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/27/2012

Susanta Kumar Jana - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Central Bank of India, - Opp.Party(s)

27 Jul 2012

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

 

Complaint case No. 27/2012                                              Date of disposal: 27/07/2012                               

BEFORE : THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT :  Mr. K. S. Samajder.

                                                     MEMBER :  Mrs. Debi Sengupta.

                                                     MEMBER :  Mr. Kapot Chattopadhyay.

For the Complainant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Mr.S. Singha .

For the Defendant/O.P.S.                          : Mr. P. Ghosh.

            Susanta Kumar Jana, S/o-Amiya Kumar Jana at Kuikota, Nazurulpalli P.O.-Midnapore,    

            P.S.-Kotwali, Dist-Paschim Medinipur………….Complainant.

                                                              Vs.

1. The Central Bank of India, Judge’s Court Branch, P.O.-Midnapore, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist-Paschim Medinipur
2. The State Bank of India (Main Branch), Collectorate More, P.O.-Midnapore, P.S.-Kotwali, Dist-Paschim Medinipur…………………Ops.

            The case of the complainant, in a nut shell, is as follows:-

The complainant, Susanta Kumar Jana has a Savings Bank Account bearing No.3064659901 with Central Bank of India Judge’s Court Branch at Medinipur.  The said bank issued an ATM card to the complainant enabling withdraw money from the ATMs of other banks including the S.B.I. which come under the core banking system.  On 24/01/2011 at about 20.03 the complainant put his ATM card in the S.B.I ATM counter at Collectorate More with a view to withdraw Rs.1,500/-.  The said amount came at the counter of the ATM but suddenly the cash amount returned back before the complainant could pick up the amount.  However, an amount of Rs.1,500/- was debited from the account of the complainant.  On the next date i.e. on 25/01/2011 the complainant informed the matter to the manager of the SBI main branch, Collectorate More, Paschim Medinipur.  He also informed the matter to his bank i.e. Central Bank of India but after about lapse of more than one year there was no fruitful result.

Hence this case:-

         Both the banks contested the case by filing separate W/Os.  The Op No.1, Central Bank of India in its W/Os contended that after receipt of the complaint of the complainant on 27/01/2011, the Manager of the bank informed the Senior Manager ATM reversal of the Bank

Contd………….P/2

- ( 2 ) - 

at Mumbai who informed the authority of the SBI, at Mumbai to look into the matter and do the needful,  but the SBI has not given any reply.  The Op No.1 contended that if the SBI does not return the amount it is not possible on the part of this bank to make reentry of the amount in the account of the complainant. The Op No.2 SBI contended that in case of return of cash to the ATM the card holder must inform the concerned bank where his account is lying.  The complainant being the account holder of the Op No.1 was supposed to file a written complaint with the said bank.  In this case, the Op No.1 has not sent any complaint to the Op No.2.  Moreover, there was no record that the money was returned to the machine of the ATM of this bank.

           It is now for our consideration as to whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as sought for.

Decisions with reasons:

           The allegation of the complainant is that he put his ATM card to the ATM  of the SBI with a view to withdraw Rs.1,500/- but the amount was returned to the machine immediately after the same came out from the machine to the cash counter.  During hearing of the case the Op Nos.1&2 as the managers of the Central Bank of India Judge’s Court branch and SBI Collectorate More, Medinipur remained present personally. The ATM of the SBI was used.  The manager of the SBI  Collectorate More fairly admitted that on the next date while his men went to the ATM  for the purpose of refilling the money it was found after checking with the statement that Rs.1,600/- was lying in excess of what it should have been as per the statement of withdrawl.  So, the fair admission was that Rs.1,600/- was found in excess in the ATM.  It was submitted on behalf of the SBI that it was not possible to decide whether the amount claimed by the complainant was within the excess amount.  However, the manager of the State Bank has also admitted that so far they are not received any complaint save and accept that what has been submitted by the complainant.  That being the position there cannot be any doubt to hold that out of the excess amount of Rs.1,600/-, it was the amount of Rs.1,500/- of the complainant which return back to the machine.  Therefore, we are of the considered view that the complainant is entitled to get back the amount of Rs.1,500/-.

              During hearing and also in their respective pleadings both the banks have stated of some technicalities.  In our considered view, whatever may be the technical aspects it is clear that the complainant’s contention to the effect that the amount Rs.1,500/- which he sought to withdraw through the ATM  of the State Bank went back to the machine before it could be collected.  Therefore, the money remained with the SBI and the SBI is liable to make transfer of the said amount to the account of the complainant lying with the Central Bank of India.  We have already mentioned that both the banks took same plea of technical grounds. Whatever may

Contd………….P/3

 

- ( 3 ) -

be the technicalities, the complainant suffered for more than a year.  We are of the view that both the banks are liable for the suffering caused to the complainant and as such we think that both the banks should be asked to pay Rs.250/- each towards compensation for harassment and litigation cost.

Hence ordered:-

              That the case succeeds on contest. The Op No.2, the Branch Manager of the SBI collectorate More, Medinipur Sadar, is hereby directed to transfer the amount of Rs.1,500/- to the Op No.1, Central Bank of India for the purpose of credit of the amount in the account number of the complainant bearing No.3064659901 within one month from this date.  The Op No.1 central Bank of India is hereby directed to credit the amount in the aforesaid account of the complainant as soon as it is received from the Op No.2. Both the Ops i.e. Op Nos.1&2 are further directed to pay Rs.250/- each to the petitioner towards compensation and cost of litigation within one month.  Such amount is also to be credited in the aforesaid account of the complainant by the stipulated date.

Dic. & Corrected by me

                                                          I agree                I agree                       

              

         President                                  Member             Member                    President

                                                                                                                  District Forum

                                                                                                              Paschim Medinipur.