DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESAL COMMISSION
NORTH 24 Pgs., BARASAT.
C.C. No. 248/2021
Date of Filing: Date of Admission: Date of Disposal:
07.10.2021 07.01.2022 03.08.2023
Complainant/s:- | Mr. Sanjoy Mondal, S/o. Mrityunjoy Mondal, Vill- Bijay Nagar, P.O. Kumra Kashipur, P.s. Habra, Dist- North 24 Parganas, Pin-743271. = Vs= |
Opposite Party/s: | Manager, Punjab National Bank, Khanyadihi, P.O. Khanyadihi Branch, P.S. Panskura, Dist- Purba Medinipur. |
P R E S E N T :- Smt. Sukla Sengupta………………….President.
:- Smt. Monisha Shaw..…………………. Member.
:- Sri. Abhijit Basu…. …………………. Member.
JUDGMENT
The instant case has been filed by the complainant under Section 34(1), (2) (d), 35, 36 and 39 of the C.P. Act, 2019.
The fact of the case in brief is that the complainant has a savings bank account in the O.P- PNB at Khanyadihi Branch, Panskura, Dist- Purba Midnapur.
It is further stated that the complainant is a resident of Bijaynagar under P.S. Habra, Dist- North 24 Parganas within the jurisdiction of this commission. His savings bank account is lying with the O.P- PNB at Khanyadihi being savings account No. 1729010446211.
It is the case of the complainant that he went to withdraw money from a near by ATM by using his ATM card issued by the O.P- bank. He went to withdraw a sum of Rs. 4,000/- from the ATM by using his ATM card through the amount was debited from his savings bank account but he did not receive the money of Rs. 4,000/-. Second time he again tried to get the amount of Rs. 4,000/- and it was a successful transaction .Thereafter the complainant went to the concerned branch of the O.P. Bank and made a complaint on 23.02.2021 being complaint No. A152536813. The O.P- bank received the said complaint but did not take any proper measure so that the complainant can get the amount back of Rs. 4,000/- to his a/c which has been deducted from his savings account as mentioned above .The complainant did not receive the money from the ATM. On several occasions the complainant tried to communicate the matter with the O.P- bank and requested the O.P to take proper measure so that the deducted amount of Rs. 4,000/- could be refunded to his account. But the O.P- bank did not take care about his written complainant as well
Contd. To Page No. 2 . . . ./
: : 2 : :
C.C. No. 248/2021
as verbal communication which amounts to gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the O.P- bank thus the complainant has filed this case before this commission with a prayer to give direction to the O.P-bank to look into the matter with utmost importance and to take necessary steps for refunding the deducted amount of Rs. 4,000/- dt. 12.2.21 to the complainant’s savings account lying in their bank.
The complainant further prayed for giving direction to the O.P-bank to provide Rs. 2,000/- to the complainant for harassment, negligence and mental pain and agony along with litigation cost.
The O.P – PNB has contested the petition of complaint by filing a written version denying all the material allegations leveled against it.
The O.P stated that they received the complaint from the complainant as per trail mail and they closed the complaint with remarks ‘Transaction Found Successful Claim Rejected’, but the complainant is not satisfied and he filed this case without having any basis thus the same is liable to be dismissed with cost.
In view of the above stated facts and circumstances points for consideration are as follows:-
- Is the case maintainable in its present form and law?
- is the complainant a consumer?
- Has the complainant any cause of action to file this case?
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
- Is the complainant entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief or reliefs is the complainant entitled to get?
Decision with Reason
All the points are taken up together for convenience discussion and to avoid unnecessary repetition.
On a close scrutiny of the materials on record it appears that the complainant has filed this case as a resident of Habra, Dist- North 24 Parganas situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this commission and he filed this case well within the period of limitation. The valuation of this case is also within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this DCDRC, Barasat. The cause of action arose in the year 202 i.e.on 23.02.2021 and the complainant made complaint to the concern branch of O.P- bank and the O.P- bank rejected his claim with observation ‘Transaction Found Succeful’ and it is also found that the Transaction was made on 12.02.2021. The complainant filed this petition of complaint before this commission on 07.10.2021. So, there was sufficient cause of action to the complainant for filing this case. Hence it is opined by this commission that the case is well maintainable in the eye of law.
Contd. To Page No. 3 . . . ./
: : 3 : :
C.C. No. 248/2021
Admittedly the complainant has a bank account in the O.P- bank at its Khanadihi Branch being A/c. No. 1729010446211. So it is safely be held by this commission that the complainant is a consumer and the O.P- PNB is a service provider.
Let us to see whether there is / was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P- bank or not.
Admittedly, the complainant has its savings account in the khanahadihi branch within the Dist- Purba Midnapur being A/c. No. 1729010446291. It is alleged by the complainant that on 12.02.2021 he went to withdraw cash of Rs. 4,000/- from a nearby ATM but subsequently he found that the amount of Rs. 4,000/- was debited from his account but he did not receive the amount. In the second he tried to withdraw a sum of Rs. 4,000/- and at that time he received the amount from the ATM and this amount was also debited from his account. Thereafter, he made complaint to the concerned branch of the O.P- bank but the O.P. bank rejected his claim with observation that the transaction found successful and the claim is rejected. It is fact that his second try to withdraw the amount of Rs. 4,000/- was successful and he received the amount from the ATM which was deducted from his savings account. But his first try was not successful. He did not receive the amount of Rs.. 4,000/- from the ATM but the amount was debited from his debited amount from his account. But the O.P- bank considering the second transaction has opined that the transaction was successful. The complainant is a consumer under the O.P- bank and the O.P-bank issued the ATM card to the complainant. From the document as annexed by the complainant it appears that the complainant went to withdraw the amount from the ATM under the controle of the O.p. Bank So, it is the sole responsibility of the O.P- bank to give protection to his customer as the ATM was under the control of the O.P- bank. In that case the O.P- bank cannot ignore the responsibility to answer in respect of the alleged incident.
In this case the O.P- bank cannot deny its responsibility to look into the matter and to refund the amount of Rs. 4,000/- to the complainant which was debited from his account but he did not receive the same from the ATM.
We have also got the support of the Bank statement issued by Punjab National Bank Khanyadihi Branch that on 12.2.2021 Rs. 4000/- was debited from the account –in question of the complainant which has not received by him from the ATM and the second try was successful and he got Rs. 4000/- from the ATM . So on 12.2.21 Rs. 8000/- was deducted from the account-in question of the complainant lying in the O.p. Bank but the O.p. Bank denied its responsibility to credit the amount in the complainants savings account -in question which it cannot . It is the sole responsibility of the O.p. bank to credit.
Contd. To Page No. 4 . . . ./
::4::
the amount to the complainants account. Under such circumstances in view of the discussion made above the commission is of view that after the occurrence dated 12.2.21 and till filing of this case the complainant being a village man on so many occasions visited the Branch of the O.p. bank and earnestly requested them to credit the amount of Rs. 4000/- actually which was debited from his account but he did not get the same from the ATM which is under the control of O.p. Bank . The O.p. bank did not pay any heed to his wards or request and denied the claim of the complainant which is amount to deficiency in service on the part of the O.p. Bank.
By their conduct they not only harassed the complainant but also neglected its customer and failed to protect the interest of the customer. For such deficiency in service on the part of the o.p. Bank it is liable to give compensation to the complainant.
On the basis of above made discussion this commission opined that there was sufficient deficiency in service on the part of service provider/ O.P. Bank and
being a consumer the complainant could be able to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubt and is entitled to get the relief as prayed for.
All the points of consideration are considered and decided favorably to the complainant.
The case is properly stamped.
Hence
It is Ordered,
That the case be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.p.s with cost of Rs. 1000/-
The complainant do get the decree as prayed for.
The O.p. is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 4000/- to the savings account of the complainant, lying in the Khanyadihi Branch of O.p. Bank situated in the district Purba Midnapur within 45 days from this date of order.
The O.p. Bank also directed to give compensation of Rs. 2000/- to the complainant within 45 days from the date of order
If the o.p. Bank will failed to comply the decree within the statuary period the complainant will be at liberty to execute the same as per law.
Let plain copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR, 2005.
Dictated & Corrected by me
President
Member Member President
