DATE OF FILING : 13.9.2010

BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, IDUKKI

Dated this the 25^th day of November, 2011

Present:

SRI.LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN PRESIDENT

SMT.BINDHU SOMAN MEMBER

C.C No.198/2010

Between

Complainant : C.M. Mathew S/o Mathai,

Chethiyil House,

Uppukandam P.O.,

Kattappana, Idukki District.

(By Adv: Jose Thomas)

And

Opposite Parties : 1. The General Manager,

ATM Project Department,

State Bank of India,

State Bank of Global IT Centre,

Wing-B, Ground Floor, Sector 11,

CBD Belapur,

Navi Mumbai – 400 614.

2. The Manager, State Bank of Patiala Branch,

New Friends Colony,

New Delhi.

(By Adv: Baby Joseph)

3. The Manager,

State Bank of India,

Kattappana ADB Branch,

Kattappana, Kattappana P.O.,

Idukki District

(By Adv: Baby Joseph)

O R D E R

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)

The complainant is a account holder of the State Bank of India, Kattappana. After depositing Rs.25,000/- in SBI Kottayam branch on 25.2.2010 in his account No.30089130658 the complainant started a journey to New Delhi. The complainant attempted to withdraw an amount of Rs.20,000/- from his account by using ATM card through ATM counter of State Bank of Patiala branch, New Friends Colony, New Delhi at about noon time on27.2.2010. The attempt was not succeeded because he never received the amount. He tried twice in the same ATM counter, but it was not

(cont.....2)

- 2 -

succeeded. Since the complainant was in urgent need of money, he approached another ATM counter of SBI, New Delhi and tried to withdraw necessary amount by using his ATM card. But it is revealed that the balance amount available in the account was only Rs.6,522/-. So he was constrained to withdraw Rs.6,000/- only from his account. It was because of the wrong entry in the computer of the opposite party an amount of Rs.20,000/- was falsely credited as withdrawn, though no amount has received by the complainant in the transaction. The attempt to withdraw the amount is wrongly credited in the account. The complainant is entitled to get Rs.26,552/- which is the outstanding balance amount as on 27.2.2010 and the amount was already deposited by the complainant in his SB account. While it was revealed by the complainant that a mistake has happened in the withdrawal entry for an amount of Rs.20,000/- and it was credited from the complainant's account, but actually the complainant never received the amount. So he immediately complained orally before the SBT Patiala branch and the officials therein informed that the ATM machine is not working properly and assured that they will enquire the matter and will deposit the lost amount in his account soon. It is also advised by the Branch Manager of the State Bank of Patiala, New Friends Colony, New Delhi, to file written complaint before the Manager, State Bank of India, Kattappana Branch in which the complainant has account, for effective and speedy remedy. Moreover, the complainant is unaware of the language of the state and have no acquaintance with the people of the locality. So the complainant filed a written complaint before the Manager, State Bank of India, Kattappana branch while he returned at Kattappana, on 8.3.2010 and a reply was received as complaint ticket No. AT 4292154351. But the complainant's grievance is not redressed from there. Thereafter the complainant issued legal notice to the opposite party on 25.6.2010 and the 3^rd opposite party alone issued a reply notice stating false allegations. The complainant sustained hardship and loss of money due to the mistake happened at the ATM counter and so this petition is filed for getting the amount of Rs.20,000/- lost from the account of the complainant and also for compensation.

2. As per the written version filed by the 1^st and 3^rd opposite parties, it is admitted that the complainant deposited Rs. 25,000/- in his account, but the transaction done by ATM Card No.6220180556000022419 through ATM SIAN50048901on 27.2.2010 for Rs.20,000/- is a successful transaction with transaction No.3525 and response code 000. This is evident from the JP Log (Electronic Journal generated by the system). The allegation regarding wrong debit is absolutely false, incorrect and hence denied. The response code 000 indicates successful transaction. It is absolutely impossible to withdraw money through ATM without using the ATM Card and the secret Personal Identification Number supplied to the Card Holder. The terms and condition relating to the ATM Card are given in

the users manual, and a copy is also produced. As per the terms and conditions, the

(cont....3)

- 3 -

Bank has the authority to debit the designated account of the Card Holder for all withdrawals effected by the Card Holder by using the card as envisaged by Bank's records which will be conclusive and binding on the Card Holder. It has also been clarified that the Bank bears no liability for the unauthorised use of the card. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the complainant to ensure the safe custody of his card and the secrecy of the PIN. Since as per the Bank's record it is a successful transaction and the amount of Rs.20,000/- has been withdrawn under the transaction in question. The bank cannot be made liable or responsible for the omission / commission if any on the part of the complainant. The claim for the refund of the said amount is untenable and unsustainable in law. The Bank is not aware of the complaint lodged by complainant with the State Bank of Patiala Branch in New Delhi. It is also admitted that the complainant submitted a letter to the bank on 8.3.2010 which is properly entertained and acknowledged to. The complainant was properly explained for the above mentioned facts as well. Successful ATM transactions are not possible without inserting a valid ATM card and keying in the correct PIN which is known only to the complainant. Hence it is imperative that the transaction No.3525 referred to above is done by the complainant's own ATM card using the PIN, which is under his custody. Hence the petition is not at all sustainable.

3. As per the written version filed by the 2^nd opposite party, the amount Rs.20,000/- was withdrawn vide transaction No.3525 on 27.2.010 at 13:21:51 as per the record of JP Log generated by the ATM No. SIAN 50048901 through ATM Card No.6220180556000022419. As per ATM switch centre, the transaction was successful. The 2^nd opposite party is maintaining the ATM SIAN 50048901 installed at its branch did not find any excess cash between the period 27.2.2010 and 2.3.2010. Hence there is no occasion of any lapses on part of the 2^nd opposite party. No oral complaint has been given by the complainant to the branch officials on 27.2.2010 and no such a reply was given that they would deposit the lost amount soon in the complainant's account. Legal notice was duly replied by the opposite party who is the operating agency of ATM machine which is submitted that 27.2.2010 was a bank holiday and the branch of the 2^nd opposite party was not functioning. So there is no occasion of visiting the complainant to the branch, complaining and alleged response of branch manager. Hence it is a concocted story created by the complainant and the petition is not sustainable.

4. The point for consideration is whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties, and if so, for what relief the complainant is entitled to?

5. The evidence consists of oral testimony of PW1 and Exts.P1 to P4 marked on the side of the complainant and oral testimony of DWs1 and 2 and Ext.R1 to R11 and Ext.X1 marked on the side of the opposite parties.

(cont.....4)

- 4 -

6. The POINT :- The complainant produced evidence as PW1. Copy of the Pay-in-Slip produced for the payment of Rs.25,000/- at SBI Kottayam Branch in the account of the complainant is marked as Ext.P1. Statement of account of the complainant at SBI Kattappana branch is marked as Ext.P2. In Ext.P2, it is written that there is a debit of Rs.20,000/- in the account of the complainant on 27.2.2010 and also Rs.6,000/- on the same day. Ext.P3 is the copy of the lawyer's notice issued by the complainant to the opposite parties. As per the complainant, he deposited Rs.25,000/- at SBI Kottayam branch as per Ext.P1 and Ext.P2 shows that there is sufficient balance in his account. But while he tried to withdraw an amount of Rs.20,000/- from his account by using ATM Card through the ATM counter of State Bank of Patiala branch, New Friends Colony, New Delhi at about noon time on 27.2.2010, he never received the amount, he tried twice, but the attempt was failure. At last he tried through the SBI counter nearby and it was revealed that there is only Rs.6,522/- in the account. So he received only Rs.6,000/- from his account. A complaint was given to the Manager of the State Bank of Patiala branch and as per the advice another written complaint was given to the 3^rd opposite party. But there was no response. So PW1 constrained to send a lawyer's notice to the 1^st to 3^rd opposite parties as per Ext.P3 and that was received by the opposite parties and the copy of its postal receipts is marked as Ext.P4. On cross examination of learned counsel for the opposite parties, it is admitted by the PW1 that, in all the transactions at ATM counter, the slips are obtaining, but no such slips has been produced by the PW1 in this case. PW1 never tried for getting the balance enquiry, but tried for getting money. Ext.R2 is the copy of the reply notice issued by the opposite party. DW1 is branch manager of the 3^rd opposite party and produced the sample slips of ATM transactions and are marked as Ext.R4(series). The transaction of the complainant on 27.2.2010 was a successful one and there was a transaction with No.3525 at 13:21:51 for an amount of Rs.20,000/- and the details of the transaction done on 27.2.2010 is marked as Ext.R3. DW1 deposed that in all the transactions in the ATM counter eventhough they are successful or not, slips will be received. Moreover, if it is not successful, it will remind that “sorry unable to handle”. The ATM card issued from the opposite party bank can be used for receiving money through other ATM counters also. ATM machine can become defective and its switching centre is at Bombay. If the messages are became blocked from the switching centre, then the machine can become fault. But it can be seen from the JP Log. It can be aware on perusing the JP Log that whether the amount has been received or not. DW2 is the Branch Manager of State Bank of Patiala. True copy of the JP Log is marked as Ext.R9. The certificate showing that there is no excess money in the bank between 27.2.2010 and 2.3.2010 is marked as Ext.R10. The date calender of the State Bank of Patiala in the year 2010 is marked as Ext.R11. The camera clippings of the ATM transaction at ATM counter of State Bank of Patiala are marked as Ext.X1(series). But the photographs are not at all clear and DW2 also

(cont.....5)

- 5 -

deposed that if there is any defect in the ATM machine, that may cause in the transaction. 27^th February was a holiday for the bank and it is seen from the calender because of “Id-e-Milad”.

It is clear from the Ext.P1 receipt issued from the bank and Ext.P2 statement of account of the complainant that there was more than Rs.25,000/- in his account on 27.2.2010. As per the complainant, while he tried for getting Rs.20,000/- on 27.2.2010 at ATM counter of State Bank of Patiala, New Friends Colony, New Delhi, the money was not received. So he tried twice there, but he was not able to get the money. So he approached another ATM counter of SBI nearby New Delhi and it was revealed that there was only a balance of Rs.6,522/- and he has withdrawn Rs.6,000/- from there. That was happened in the noon and in the same day itself immediately he filed a complaint at the Manager of the 2^nd opposite party and he directed the complainant to file a written complaint at the 3^rd opposite party branch and also assured that the amount of Rs.20,000/- will be deposited soon in his account. As per the opposite party, the transaction was a successful one and slips were also issued and it shows that Rs.20,000/- has been withdrawn from the ATM counter. As per the opposite party, in all the transactions at the ATM counter, transaction slips are obtaining from the counter and Ext.R4(series) are the samples of the same. In every successful transaction, the slips will be received and the transaction will be successful only if the secret code has been used by the complainant. The secret code is known to the complainant himself and not known to other persons and if there is any complaint caused to the ATM machine, the JP Log will show the transaction and if any amount received or not received, JP Log of the machine will show the same. Ext.R9 JP Log shows that on 27.2.2010, as transaction No.3525, a withdrawal of Rs.20,000/- has been done from the account No.00000030089130658 from the ATM No. SIAN50048901 at the time 13:21. The details of the same is also produced as Ext.R3 and is also shows that the transactions done by the card No.6220180556000022419 from the ATM SIAN50048901 on 27.2.2010 at 13:21:51 for Rs.20,000/- is shown as successful with transaction No.3525. On cross examination of the learned counsel for the opposite party, PW1 deposed that he has received transaction slips from the ATM counter at New Delhi from the 2^nd opposite party's ATM counter, but they were entrusted to the advocate, by the PW1. So we think that the only evidence for the successful transaction of the ATM counter is the transaction slips and that is also deposed by the PW1. But they were not at all produced by the complainant. The learned counsel of the complainant argued that the slips are not clear and so they are not produced by them but eventhough the unclear slips are not produced by the complainant. He has tried twice at the ATM counter of the opposite party. PW1 also deposed that while he was unable to receive the amount from the ATM counter, he complained orally to the Manager of the 2^nd opposite party at New Delhi. Ext.R11 is the calender of State Bank of Patiala for the

(cont....6)

- 6 -

year 2010, in which Ext.R11(a) is the page of February shows that 27.2.2010 is a holiday due to Id-e-Milad/Milad-un-Nabi (Birthday of Prophet Mohd.). The opposite party argued that the bank was a holiday on that day and nobody were there at the office on that day. So the version of the complainant is not at all believable that he complained the same matter to the bank manager on the same day itself and the manager directed him to complaint at Kattappana branch and also assured that his amount will be deposited in the account soon. The complainant never produced any evidence or slips which are received as transaction slip from the ATM counter of the opposite party. The JP Log is the only document shows the transactions of the ATM counter and in the JP Log it is very clear that the complainant has been withdrawn Rs.20,000/- from the bank. So there is no evidence produced by the complainant to show that there is deficiency in service from the part of the opposite party.

Hence the petition dismissed. No cost is ordered against the complainant.

Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 25^th day of November, 2011

Sd/-

SRI. LAIJU RAMAKRISHNAN (PRESIDENT)

Sd/-

SMT. BINDHU SOMAN (MEMBER)

(cont.....7)

- 7 -

APPENDIX

Depositions :

On the side of the Complainant :

PW1 - C.M. Mathew.

On the side of the Opposite Parties :

DW1 - Smitha S. Nair.

DW2 - B.G. Ravikumar.

Exhibits :

On the side of the Complainant :

Ext.P1 - Copy of the Pay-in-Slip for the payment of Rs.25,000/-

at SBI Kottayam.

Ext.P2 - Statement of account of the complainant at SBI Kattappana.

Ext.P3 - Copy of the lawyer's notice issued by the complainant to the

opposite parties.

Ext.P4 - Copy of the postal receipts – 3 Nos.

On the side of the Opposite Parties :

Ext.R1 - Copy of the letter given by the complainant to the Branch

Manager of the SBI Kattappana.

Ext.R2 - Copy of the reply notice issued by the opposite party,

dated 14.8.2010.

Ext.R3 - The details of the transaction done by the complainant

on 27.2.2010.

Ext.R4 - Samples of transaction slips are obtaining from the counter.

Ext.R5 - Details of the error code and its descriptions.

Ext.R6 - Receipt of the complaint.

Ext.R7 - Copy of the reply notice issued by the opposite party,

dated 14.8.2010.

Ext.R8 - Copy of the letter issued by the Deputy General Manager, SBI

dated 12.7.2010.

Ext.R9 - Copy of the JP Log.

Ext.R10 - The certificate issued by the Manager, State Bank of Patiala,

New Friends Colony, New Delhi Branch, dated 2.12.2010.

Ext.R11 - The calender of State Bank of Patiala for the year 2010.

Ext.X1 - The camera clippings of the ATM transaction at ATM counter of

State Bank of Patiala.