D.O.F:31/12/2019

                                                                                                  D.O.O:21/11/2022

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION KASARAGOD

CC.No.267/2019

Dated this, the 21^th day of November 2022

PRESENT:

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                         :PRESIDENT

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                            : MEMBER

Abdulla Munazzil.P.M, aged 28 years,

S/o Mohammedkunhi.P.A, Residing at

Patla House, Pulikunnu, Kasaragod – 671121

Represented by his Power of Attorney holder                : Complainant

Muhammed Kunhi.P.A, aged 56 years

S/o G. Abdulla, R/at Patla House,

Pulikunnu, Kasaragod Post, Kasaragod.

(Adv: Sureshbabu.V)

And

The Manager,

Canara Bank, Misiriya Complex,                                      : Opposite Party

M.G.Road, Kasaragod.

(Adv: K.Sadanada Kamath)

ORDER

SRI.KRISHNAN.K : PRESIDENT

          The complainant is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

          The case of complainant is that he is holding an account with Opposite party bank and he is running a hotel but willing to go abroad.  He received a phone call from Opposite party bank informing him about a debit of Rs. 19856/- from his account during last week of July 2019 by using credit card.  But has not obtained credit card.  He went to bank and gave details of debit and informed that he did not credit or debit the amount.

          Entry in his pass book shows that Rs. 19856/- is shown as withdrawn as on 29/11/2019.  Later he came to know that ST. REGIS hotel 6” is not in India but outside country.  During the relevant period complainant was in India, hence bank is liable to pay the wrong debit and damages and compensation of Rs.10,000/- now a sum of Rs. 25537/- is due to bank from complainant, wrongly claimed by bank.

          The Opposite party filed written version denying the allegations and averments in complaint.  It is not a credit card transaction; it is a visa ATM debit card transaction.  The complainant was informed to bank.  He came and got entry in his passbook and admitted the transaction.  His passbook entry shows that on 26/04/2019 an amount of Rs. 19856/- is withdrawn.  The Opposite party denied that complainant suffered mental tension or entitled to receive Rs. 22,042/- on 30/11/2019.  Transaction is admitted orally but customer later insist its payment.  And complainant is not entitled to any relief from Opposite party. 

The power of attorney of complainant filed chief affidavit and was cross examined as Pw1.  Ext A1 and A2 documents marked, Ext A1 is power of attorney and Ext A2 is passbook, the Opposite party filed chief affidavit and cross examined.  Ext B1 e-mail communication and its reply produced by bank considering the averments and contentions following points arise for consideration.

1. Whether the claim of complainant that a sum of Rs. 22042/- is debited from his account without his consent and if so whether he is entitled to the disputed amount plus compensation?
2. Whether there is any deficiency in service from Opposite party? If so for what relief complainant is entitled for?

The complaint is filed by attorney holder of the complainant.Ext A1 is the original power of attorney.There is no law which prohibits filiing of complaint through power of attorney.Power of attorney is marked without objection.

The definite case of complainant is that amount to his credit is seen debited without his consent or knowledge, that he did not withdraw the amount thereby debit shown is not as per mandate of law and he is entitled to the amount with compensation.Whereas bank say an account of Rs. 25537/- is due to the bank by complainant.

But till date no legal action is taken by bank for recovery of the amount claimed by bank.Entry in pass book Ext A2 shows the entry relating to the amount.Bank has no case that customer himself or anybody on his behalf withdraw the amount on a particular date from a particular ATM centre.

There is no reason to disbelieve the case of complainant or power of attorney holder in the case.The Opposite party has definite case that bank informed debit of Rs. 19586/- using his credit card but no details as to who is the recipient. Whereas recipient as per complainant is STREGIS international hotel abroad, when complainant is in India.Even Opposite party deposes that they sent complaint of wrong debit but replied that complaint was beyond 60 days and hence cannot claim the amount if it is wrongly debited.If really amount is due to bank to the tune of Rs. 25,537/- no legal action is taken till date even after more than about three years shows that their contention is just to defeat the claim of complainant.

Hence considering the evidence on record Commission finds that a sum of Rs. 22042/- is wrongly debited from the amount of complainant and hence bank is liable to refund by credit of the said amount to the credit of account of the complainant.There is deficiency in service and negligence on the part of Opposite party bank for which they are liable to pay compensation.In the circumstances of the case we fixes the amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- and complainant also entitled for cost of the litigation.

In the result complaint is allowed in part.The Opposite party bank is directed to pay the sum of Rs. 22042/- with 8% from 31/12/2019 till its realization complainant and also to pay Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation and also Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost of the litigation either by credit to his account in the bank within one month from the date of receipt of order.

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-

MEMBERMEMBERPRESIDENT

Exhibits

A1- Power of attorney

A2- Pass book

B1- E-mail communication

Witness Examined

Pw1- Muhammed Kunhi. P.A

Dw1- Nithin.P.V

Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-

MEMBERMEMBERPRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

                                                                                    Assistant Registrar

Ps/