IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MADIKERI

ORDER DELIVERED BY HON’BLE MEMBER

SMT. GOWRAMMANNI

1. This complaint filed under section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The Complaint Prayed that to grant following relief against the Opposite parties;

1. Rs.1,00,000/- as damage towards mental agony  and the deficiency in service and also the insult faced in front of the friends in abroad,
2. Suitable reliefs be granted in favor of the complainant awarding the cost towards the complaint.

2.  Brief facts of the complaint of the complainant is as under;

1. The complainant is having a Saving Bank Account in Opposite Parties of Murnad Branch, Madikeri Taluk, Kodagu District. He had planned a trip to Thailand in the month of September-2023 for which he had applied for the International Debit Card at Madikeri Branch, and he had been furnished with the same and he followed all the instruction mentioned by the bank to activate the card and the card was activated. Complainant used the said debit card for his international transactions during his visit to Thailand. Further Complainant submit that he used the said card on 19/09/2023 at King Power Duty Free Bangkok, to purchase liquor which cost at Rs.3,846/- and the said amount was debited from his account and was not credited to the receivers account due to which a lot of inconvenience. Later on the same day complainant used the said card to withdraw 10,000 baht The nearest ATM Machine, the said transaction appeared as failed transaction but the amount was debited from his account and he had not received any cash and a Sum of Rs.415 and 118/- was deducted towards transaction charges from his account.  
2. Complainant was not able to contact opposite parties bank as he was in international roaming and there was a network issue so he had raised the complaint through E-mail. After returning back from Thailand complainant had called Opposite parties Customer Care on 25/09/2023 and raised a complaint in regard to the transaction for which they assure complainant that the said amount will be refunded to complainant’s account by 30/09/2023, but opposite parties they were not resolved the problems thereafter complainant tried to contact opposite parties customer care and Branch Manager regarding deficiency in Service for resolving the complaint for which opposite party No.4 replied in a very negligent and inattentive matter.
3. Due to the above act and consequences complainant was mentally disturbed for the deficiency in service in abroad and also felt ashamed in front of his friends and also struggled a lot for refund of the said amount leaving behind his important work and also he visited the Home Branch of SBI Multiple times as there was no proper response from opposite parties customer care executives which costed him a lot. Hence This complaint.  

3. After registration of the complaint, notice was issued to opposite party. In response to the notice, Opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed their version.

4.  Brief Facts of the Version filed by the Opposite parties No.1-4:-

1.  The Complainant had applied for Rupay Platinum International Debit Card at Madikeri Branch and he was issued a Card Ending with No.5569 linked to account No.20344506562 . The complainant was provided with User Guide at the time of issuance along with the international Debit Card and it is the duty of Every Customer to go through the User Guide before using the Card. As per NPCI report, the transaction was successful from the OP No.04 Branch End. As per network guidelines (Master Card) Visa Rupay acquiring Banks Merchants are required to claim the settled amount from the Issuing Bank through part network within time lines prescribed sent by the networks. However refund was done as per network guidelines on unclaimed amount from acquiring bank on 09/10/2023 there is no deficiency in service. Further opposite parties they contended that in their records the complainant had undertaken  the aforementioned ATM transaction through another Debit Card ending with No.2743 on the same day initially the complainant had attempted to withdraw 10,.000/-baht which was unsuccessful No Service charges were debited from the unsuccessful transaction. Subsequently he withdraw another amount of Rs.10,069/- with reference No.599150306 on the same day which was successful towards this successful transactions the service charges of Rs.415/- and 118/- were debited since the transaction was successful. The service charges were not refunded to the complainant. The Bank did not gave any deadline to refund the amount. However all the amounts unsuccessful transactions were duly refund within reasonable period of time. Further they took a specific contention that they have taken every effort to resolve the grievance by 30/09/2023 but they could not close the grievance as informed. Further they contended that as they require more time hence they inform to complainant.  Once Registered online cannot be re-registered since the complaint was already registered on 25/09/2023 for which a token Number also issued to the complaint another complaint with the same grievance could not be re-registered which was inform to the complainant. Opposite parties denied the allegations made in the complaint further they submitted that Bank is a public sector bank having its branches all over India and abroad by providing good service to the public at large. The Complainant is aware that all the transactions was passed through online system automatically and any amount if debited from the complainant account to the receivers account in foreign country and if the same is not radiate the amount will be re-credited reversed through online system and there are no chances for manual intervention except to complaint through online system.  The complainant is educated and also having knowledge over the online system. Hence the opposite parties is not liable to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- as mentioned in the complaint.
2. No Cause of action for the complainant to file the case against the opposite party. The complaint is not maintainable under any circumstances of law and facts. The complainant suppressed the truth and the relief sought by the complainant in the complaint is not maintainable under any circumstance of law. Wherefore it is prayed that the Hon’ble Commission may be pleased to dismiss the complaint with cost in the interest of Justice.  

5. In this case complainant filed her examination-in-chief by way of affidavit evidence as CW-1 with 06 documents marked as exhibits C-1 to C-6. And The Opposite parties had filed their examination-in-chief by way of affidavit evidence taken as RW-1. With 03 documents marked as exhibits R-1 to R-3. Complainant filed their Oral arguments. Where the Opposite parties have file their Written arguments and Heard the Oral Arguments of the both sides and posted for orders.

6. The points that would arise for our consideration are as under;

1. Whether the complainant proves the deficiency in service by the opposite parties and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought ?
2.  What order ?

7.   Our findings on the above points are as under;

1. Point No.1 :- Partly Affirmative
2. Point No.2:- As per the final order for        
   13031.  

R E A S O N S

1. Point No.1:-  Complainant is having a Saving Bank Account in Opposite parties Bank bearing Account No. 20344506562 of Murnad Branch and he had planned trip to Thailand in the Month of September-2023 for which he had applied for International Debit Card at Madikeri Branch. OP No.1 is the chairman of State Bank of India, OP No.2 is the SBI Zonal Local Head Office, OP No.3 is the Regional Business Office. Complainant is the customer of OP No.4. He used the said Debit Card for his International Transaction during his visit to Thailand.
2. Hear in the above case opposite parties were admitted the facts of the complaint there is no dispute with regard to issuance of the international Debit Card. The main dispute arose in this case opposite parties were committed deficiency of service to complainant.
3. Perused the contents of the complaint and Affidavit Evidence the Complainant in their Affidavit he has sworn all facts which were pleaded in the complaint. The Only determination of question is that whether the complainant is entitled the reliefs as sought in the prayer. For which we gone through materials placed before the commission we carefully observed that Exhibit C-1 to C-6 documents. Complainant gave a Notice to Opposite parties on 21/11/2023 called upon to pay them the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for deficiency in the service, to the insult faced by him in front of his friends in abroad. The said notice was served to Opposite parties and they have given reply to the complainant on 30/12/2023. Exhibit C-5 Bank statement and Exhibit C-6 Message sent to complainant by OP No.4 Bank.
4. In this case complainant alleged in their complaint that at first he used the said card on 19/09/2023 at King Power Duty Free,  Bangkok  to purchase liquor which cost at Rs.3,845/- and the said amount was debited from his account and was not credited to the receivers account. Later on the same day he used the said card to withdraw 10,000 baht from the nearest ATM machine which was present in Chomburi, Pattaya and the said transaction appeared as failed transaction but the amount was debited from his account and he had not received any cash and a sum of Rs.415/- and Rs.118/- was debited from his account Transaction charges from the account. Thereafter returning back from Thailand he had raised a complaint to opposite parties customer care on 25/09/2023 In regard to the transactions for which they assured him to that the said amount will be refunded to his account by 30/09/2023 and issued a case No. and same was sent through SMS to the complainant. But it was not resolved on the assured date. For that complainant specifically argued that again on 01/10/2023 he was received a message from opposite parties “We have taken every effort to resolve your grievance by 30/09/2023 But, we could not close the grievance as informed. As we require more time, we wish to inform that your complaint with Ticket No.313024451, will be resolved by 05/10/2023 We deeply regret for the inconvenience”. It will be resolved by 05/10/2023 but the same was not resolved on 05/10/2023 on which he was tried to contact OP’s Customer Care and Branch manager of OP No.4 regarding Deficiency in service for resolving the complaint for which OP No.4 replied in a very negligent and inattentive manner.  
5. Herein the above case opposite party they were admitted the facts of the complaint but denied the deficiency of service and negligence of service caused by the OP No.4. In support of their defense OP Counsel vehemently argued that a complaint Once Registered Online cannot be re-registered. The Opposite party No.4 has refunded the Debited unclaimed amount from acquiring bank on 09/10/2023 within the limited period of time. That the service charges were debited towards successful transactions and therefore were not refunded. Further learned counsel argued that bank is a public sector bank having its function all over India and abroad by providing good service to the public at large. Complainant is aware that all the transactions was passed through online system automatically and any amount if debited from the complainant account to the receivers account in foreign country and if the same is not credited the amount will be re-credited through online system and there are no chances for manual intervention. Except to complain through online system. Further they argued that as per RBI Circular Rs.100 per day, Day of delay behind T+5 days if both the organization and beneficiary are within the India. Hence the Opposite party has not liable to pay the compensation.
6. In support of their arguments both the parties were produced the RBI Circular, we gone through the materials placed before the commission carefully observed that the Debit card can be used to withdraw cash from an ATM, purchase of goods and services at Points of Sale (PoS) terminals or e-commerce (online purchase). They can be used domestically, or internationally. In case of failed ATM Transaction when his account is debited though banks are supposed to reverse such transactions on their own, it is always a good practice to lodge a complaint with the card issuing bank or ATM owner bank at earliest. In case of failed ATM Transaction the bank have been mandate to re-credit the customer account with a maximum T+5 calendar day. In this case opposite party No.4 was not re-credit the amount to the complainant account within prescribed RBI guideline times the amount deducted from the complainant account on 19/09/2023 but the said amount not credited to the receivers account even though opposite party No.4 not yet resolve the problem or neither re-credit the amount to complainant account later on 09/10/2023 the deducted amount was re-credited to complainant account after the delay of 20 days. As per RBI Guidelines OP’s have not made any sincere effort to resolve the problem within stipulated period for the aforesaid circumstance of the case the defense taken by the opposite party does not hold by the commission. Section 2(11) Defined “Deficiency” means any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been otherwise in relation to any service and includes-

1. Any act of negligence or omission or commission by such person which causes loss or injury to the consumer; and
2. Deliberate withholding of relevant information by such person to the consumer;

     Op argued that service charges were debited towards successful transaction and therefore were not refunded. As per RBI guidelines they produce Exhibit R-1 in that documents it shows Rs.118/- and Rs.435/- debited for service charges. The transaction carried out through Cards protected against fraudulent usage All CP and CNP transactions on cards issued in India are secured with AFA. This AFA can be in any form and few commonly used forms are PIN, dynamic one-time password (OTP), Static Code, etc., The requirement of AFA is not mandatory for transactions where outflow of foreign exchange is contemplated. For such Circumstance the contention taken by the Opposite parties is not sustainable in the eye of law.

7. Consumer commission are required to make an attempt to serve ends of Justice so that compensation is awarded in an established case with not only service the purpose of re-compensating the individual but also at the same time aims bring about a qualitative change in the attitude of the service provider. In this case complainant is a law graduate person he oppose a negligent attitude of the Opposite parties he had gone several times to approach the opposite parties to resolve his problems. He will suffer lot of humiliation in front of his friends in abroad and also suffer mental agony due to the negligence act of the opposite parties. He prayed compensation for Rs.1,00,000/- for the deficiency of service. As per RBI Guidelines and facts and circumstances of the case we opined complainant is entitled only for Rs. 20,000/- for deficiency of service caused by the opposite parties and 3,000/- for the Cost of the proceedings. For the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case we answer Point No.1 in Partly Affirmative.

8. Point No.2:- From the discussion made above and conclusion  arrived at, we pass the following order;

O R D E R

1. The complaint of the complainant under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019 is partly allowed.
2. The Opposite Party No.1 to 4 are jointly or severally is liable to pay the compensation of Rs.20,000/-(Twenty Thousand Rupees) for deficiency of service to the complainant within   45 days from the date of receipt of this order.  Failing which opposite parties are directed to pay interest at 10% per annum with said amount till the realization of this order.

3. The Opposite Party No.1 to 4 Jointly or Severally is further liable to pay the compensation of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) towards cost of proceedings.
4. Copy of this order as per statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of cost and file shall be consigned to record room.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed, corrected and pronounced in     the Open Commission on this 26^th DAY OF AUGUST, 2024)

  (GOWRAMMANNI)                      (RENUKAMBA.C)                                                     

                        MEMBER                              PRESIDENT(I/C)                      

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant

CW-1-   Sachith.K.H. S/o Harish.K.R., aged 26 Years, Biligeri Village and Post,   Madikeri.

Documents marked on behalf of the complainant

Ex.C-1 :- Office Copy of the Notice

Ex.C-2:-  Postal Receipt

Ex.C-3 :- AD Card

Ex.C-4:-  Reply Notice

Ex.C-5:-  Statement of Account

Ex.C-6:-  Text Message from SBI dated 01/10/2023

Witnesses examined on behalf of the opposite party

          RW-1-  Ramesh.T S/o Raveendran.T., aged 40 years, Branch Manager, State Bank of                         India, Murnad Branch.

Documents marked on behalf of the opposite party:  NIL

Ex.R-1:- Legal Notice-failed ATM Transaction (International   transaction) issued to Sri.Sachith, Adv. Complainant (Online Computer Copy)

Ex.R-2:- Account details of Mr.Sachith.K.M. dated 19/09/2023 (Online Computer Copy)

Ex.R-3:- Circular of RBI dated 20/09/2019

 (GOWRAMMANNI)

Dated: 26/08/2024                                     MEMBER