Orissa

Rayagada

CC/201/2015

Meenakshi Choudhury - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, SBI, Rayagada - Opp.Party(s)

Self

09 Mar 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, RAYAGADA,

C.C. Case No.201/ 2015.

               

P R E S E N T .

Sri Gadadhara Sahu,B.Sc.                                  Member

AND

 Smt. Padmalaya Mishra, LL.B                    Member

 

Meenakshi Choudhury,D/o Gopinath Choudhury,DFO Office,5^th Line(Ring Road)Raniguda Farm,Rayagada.

                                                                     ………….Complainant

Versus

1. The Branch Manager, State bank of India, Rayagada.
2. Manager, SBI, New Delhi Branch.
3. Manager,SBI,Mumbai Branch.                               ……….Opp.Parties

 

For the complainant: In person

For the O.ps.: Sri P.Ch.Dash,Advocate, Rayagada.

 

JUDGMENT

                The brief facts of the complaint is that    complainant is a customer of O.P. No.1 vide SBI account No.33559290450 having facility to operate the account through ATM . On 23/05/2015 an amount of aRs.28,975/-  has been debited from the account of the complainant in six spells and on receipt of message  the complainant  immediately proceeded to the SBI and blocked the ATM and also reported the matter  B.M,SBI Main Branch, Rayagada and  to the OIC, Police Station Rayagada  and  prayed to direct the O.ps to refund the said sum amount with interest to the complainant. Hence, this complaint.

 

                On being notice, the O.ps appeared and filed their counter denying  the allegations of the complainant.  It is submitted by the Ops that the account statement attached to the complaint petition shows that they are online purchase made by the complainant or somebody else who was acquainted with the account number of the complainant  which the complainant might have exposed  through ATM card number , pass ward ,OTP etc. and for this  the OP has no relation for the said transactions. Therefore the complaint is not maintainable against the present OP  as the OP has not committed any deficiency of service.                                                                                                                                                                                    

FINDINGS

                We have gone through the records and documents filed by the parties and also heard the  arguments . The  allegations of the complainant  is that  on 23.05.2015  a sum of Rs.28,975/-  has been debited from the account of the complainant .In its reply, the O.ps has submitted that  the account statement attached to the complaint petition shows that they are online purchase made by the complainant or somebody else who was acquainted with the account number of the complainant  which the complainant might have exposed  through ATM card number , pass ward ,OTP etc. and for this  the OP has no relation for the said transactions. They have also filed the details of transaction made  by the complainant. On verification of bank statement filed by the complainant  it reveals that  all the transactions were made on 23/05/205 and there are six transactions on the same day but  question arises in our mind that  at the time of first transaction the balance in account of the complainant is Rs.1,04,898/-  and the online  transaction  for an amount of Rs.9,900/- was made and subsequently Rs.6,000/-,2985/-,2500/-,2500/-,5000/- and Rs.100/- was made simultaneously. If the transaction was not made in the consent of the complainant and any other person has made the same fraud, how he left the balance of Rs.85,813/- , he could have taken all the balance amount from the account of the complainant  and he would not have left the balance of Rs.85,813. Hence, it is clear that the complainant must have given the card details to someone or she herself has made the alleged transactions for which we can not make liable to the  Opposite Parties  and we do not found any fault or    negligent on the part  of the O.ps, as such  the O.ps are not liable to return the said amount to the complainant. Hence, order.

 

ORDER

        In view of the aforesaid discussion we do not fault any fault from the side of the Ops and hence the complaint is  having no merit and dismissed on contest.

                Pronounced in open forum today on this 12^th day of April,2017 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                 A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

Member                                                              President I/c

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy of written complaint to the OP 1.
2. Xerox copy of complaint to the OIC, Rayagada.
3. Xerox copy of account statement
4. Xerox copy of details of transactions.

 

 

                                                                 President I/c