(Delivered on 16/7/2018)

Per Smt. Jayshree Yengal, Hon’ble Member

1. The original complainant Mr. Prakash Vitthal Gaurkar has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by an order dated 8/9/2015, passed by the District Consumer Forum, Chandrapur dismissing the consumer complaint bearing No. 125/2013.
2. Appellant Mr. Prakash Vitthal Gaurkar and respondent No. 1 Punjab National Bank through its Manager and respondent No. 2 ICICI Bank Chandrapur Branch through its Manager are referred to in their original status as complainant and opposite party ( for short OP) Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, for the sake of convenience.
3. Facts in brief as set out by the complainant  in his complaint are as under.

1. Complainant is having a saving account bearing No. 0534000400113560 with the OP No. 1 Punjab National Bank. The complainant also has an ATM Card bearing No. 5126520140496618 of the aforesaid bank. The complainant was in need of cash. Therefore he operated the ATM machine of OP No. 2 ICICI Bank on 27/01/2013 to withdraw Rs. 10,000/- The balance in the complainants account was Rs. 14,128/-. However the cash sought to be withdrawn by ATM was neither disbursed nor the receipt about the same was emerged from the ATM machine. The complainant immediately complained about it to OP No.2. The OP No. 2 however assured immediate action in respect of the same.
2. The complainant then visited OP No. 1/bank and checked the entries in his account and he noticed that Rs. 10,000/- were debited to his account on 27/1/2013. The complainant immediately complained about it to OP No. 1/ Bank also and informed to  that he had neither received the cash of Rs. 10,000/- nor the receipt. The OP No. 1 bank also assured the complainant  of prompt action.
3. As the complainant was not informed about any action from 27/1/2013 to 2/2/2013, the complainant lodged the complaint at the toll free number of OP No. 1/Punjab National Bank. The complainant again filed a complaint in the toll free number of OP No.1. On enquiry the complainant  was informed that his complaint was rejected and he was informed to register his complaint with OP No. 2 ICICI bank.
4. The complainant on 9/2/2013 lodged the complaint with OP No. 2. The OP No. 2 initially avoided to accept his complaint. However later on OP No. 2 advised the complainant to pursue his complaint with OP No. 1.

The complainant repeatedly filed a complaints before OP No. 1 Punjab National Bank on 12/2/2013 in writing and by email on 13/3/2013, 16/3/2013. The senior officer of OP No. 1 informed the complainant by email on 21/3/2013 that the complaint was rejected.

The complainant again repeated his complaint before OP No. 1 on 5/4/2013 and 18/6/2013. The OP No. 1 did not take cognizance of the same.

5. As the OP No. 1 Punjab National Bank and OP No. 2 ICICI bank failed to take any cognizance, the complainant issued a legal notice  to the OPs on 25/6/2013 and 21/6/2013. The OPs failed to take any cognizance therefore. Hence alleging deficiency in service, the complainant filed consumer complaint and sought for remittance of Rs. 10,000/-  with 9 percent  per annum interest to the complainant  till its realization by the OPs, Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation for mental, physical and monitory loss, and Rs. 25,000/- towards the expenses incurred by the complainant who was required to  repeatedly visit the OPs to resolve his grievance, and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation charges.

4. The OP No. 1 Punjab National Bank through its Branch Manager and OP No. 2 ICICI through its branch Manager resisted the complaint by filing their written version and denied all the adverse allegations of the complainant.
5. The OP No. 1 PNB has specifically submitted in its written version  that the photographs and clips of the ATM operations which are on record clearly  reflect that the complainant had operated the ATM machine and the transaction was complete. Had the transaction failed or rendered incomplete then  the transaction would have been cancelled and receipt to such effect would have emerged from the ATM Machine.
6. The OP No. 2 ICICI bank in its written version has specifically submitted that the complainant is not its consumer as he is not having any bank account with it. Therefore the complaint deserves to be dismissed against it.
7. The Forum below after hearing both the sides dismissed the consumer complaint as aforesaid. The Forum has specifically observed that EJ filed by the OP No. 2 reflects in detail the ATM transaction dated 27/1/2013 in which  the time of transaction, the amount of withdrawal  and the debit in the complainant’s account is reflected. The Forum holding accordingly accepted that OP Nos. 1 and 2 banks have not rendered deficiency in service nor  adopted unfair trade practice and therefore the complaint is liable to be  dismissed.
8. Being aggrieved, the complainant has filed this appeal and challenged the impugned order mainly on the ground that the respondent No. 2 never complied  the order passed by the Forum below directing it to file photographic clips on record and also the Switch Report of ATM Machine of respondent No. 2 clearly indicates that the amount of Rs. 10,000/- was reversed back into the ATM machine of respondent No. 2 and the transaction of the appellant had failed.
9. The appellant and respondent No. 1  filed written notes of arguments.  Respondent No. 2 was proceeded exparte. None for the appellant was present at the time of oral submissions. The counsel for respondent No. 1 however filed a pursis that the written  notes of arguments filed by  respondent No. 1 be treated as oral arguments. We perused the written notes of arguments filed by the appellant and respondent No.1. We also perused copies  of the complaint, written version and documents filed by both the parties.
10. The first ground of challenge to the impugned order in respect of the photograph clips being not filed by the respondent in spite of the order passed by the Forum below cannot be accepted as the order to produce the photo clips of ATM machine is dated  9/10/2014. The impugned order is passed on 8/9/2015.  Para 3 of the impugned order, makes a mention that respondent No. 2 has handed over the photographs to the complainant. The complainant has nowhere challenged before the Forum that such photograph were never filed nor the same were being handed over to him. There is period of almost 1 year from the date of passing of the order till the final decision of the consumer complaint. There is no evidence on record that the complainant had objected to the non production of photographs by the respondent in spite of the order passed by the Forum. The Forum in the impugned order on the contrary has taken note of the photographs being given to the complainant. Therefore the said ground of challenge does not hold good  to the impugned order.
11. The second ground of challenge to the impugned order that the transaction of the appellant had failed and the amount was reversed. The appellant has relied on the Switch Report of the ATM machine. We perused the same  and find that the appellants account number, card number and the transaction details are as follows-  The transaction date 13/01/27, time 11.51.33, amount Rs. 10,000/-. The entry just below the appellant’s entry reflects reversal – “ – 10,000” The only inference that can be drawn  from said transaction details is the reversal as claimed by the appellant is not in respect of his transaction, on the contrary the Switch Report clearly reflects the transaction of withdrawal at the ATM is completed in the appellant’s account.
12. For the foregoing reason, we find no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the Forum below in dismissal of  the consumer complaint. The appeal therefore deserves to be dismissed being devoid of merits. In the result, we pass the following order.

ORDER

1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The impugned order dated 8/9/2015  passed by the District Consumer Forum, Chandrapur, in consumer complaint bearing No. 125/2013 is confirmed.
3. No order as to cost in appeal.
4. Copy of the order be furnished to both the parties, free of cost.