Date of Filing : 05.10.2009
Date of Order : 04.03.2016.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L., : PRESIDENT
TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B., : MEMBER I
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.1022/2009
FRIDAY THIS 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2016
1.Consumer Protection Council, Tamilnadu,
2 RMS Bldg. Thillai Nagar Main Road,
Tiruchirappalli -18,
On behalf of
2. Ms. M.Lakshmi
Postal Assistant,
Palanipet,
Arakkonam,
Vellore District 631 002. ..Complainants
..Vs..
1. The Manager,
Indian Bank,
L.B.Road Brach,
Thiruvanmiyur,
Chennai – 41.
2. The Manager,
Canara Bank,
NO.14th Thirumalai Achari Street,
Arakkonam 631 001. ..Opposite parties
For the Complainants : Party in person.
For the Opposite party-1 : M/s. Anand, Samy & Dhruva
For the opposite party-2 : M/s. S.Selvathirumurugan & another
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay Rs.100/- a day from 9.12.2007 to 19.4.2008 totaling Rs.13,000 and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and mental agony and cost of the complaint to the 2nd complainant.
ORDER
THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT
1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-
The complainants submit that the 2nd complainant is holding S.B account with debit card facility with 2nd opposite party the Canara bank Arakkonam Branch. The 1st opposite party bank is maintaining ATM booth at LB Road, Chennai. When the 2nd complainant attempted to withdraw a sum of Rs.15,000/-on 9.12.2007 in the ATM at LB road Chennai maintained by 1st opposite party by using the said debit card, the amount was not delivered but she had received only the receipt as if the said amount withdrawn by the 2nd complainant. The complainant has stated that she has immediately approached the Branch Manager, Indian Bank, LB Road, Chennai regarding the same for enquiring for recredit the said amount in her account. However it was informed that this may be due to fault of the ATM machine as per the statement the excess amount found will be made credited in the 2nd complainant’s account and she was asked to approach the 2nd opposite party bank with whom the complainant is holding account. Accordingly the complainant had sent letter to the 2nd opposite party dated 11.12.2007 requesting the 2nd opposite party to re-credit the said amount of Rs.15,000 in her SB account by furnishing the copy of the ATM withdrawal slip. Despite of several demands made by the 2nd complainant to the opposite parties the said amount was not re deposited in her account immediately but was credited only on 9.5.2008 only. As such the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant. As such the complainant has sought for a sum of Rs.100/- a day from 9.12.2007 to 19.4.2008 totaling Rs.13,000/- and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and mental agony and cost of the complaint to the 2nd complainant. Hence the complaint.
Written Version of 1st opposite party is briefly as follows:
2. The opposite parties denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein. There is no privity of contract between the 1st opposite party and the complainants in respect of re-credit of amount in the account maintained by the 2nd complainant with the 2nd opposite party. The 1s opposite party is not a necessary party to the proceedings. If the acquiring bank does not dispute the claim, the concerned bank has to re-credit the acquiring bank settlement. As far as re-credit of amount to the account of the 1st complainant is concerned it is the sole responsibility of 2nd opposite party and 1st opposite party is nothing to do with the same. Hence there has been no delay or deficiency on the part of the 1st opposite party. Therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Written Version of 2nd opposite party is briefly as follows:
3. The opposite parties denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein. It is admitted that on 11.12.2007 the 2nd complainant gave a letter to the 2nd opposite party requesting to recredit her account with Rs.15,000/-. Immediately after receiving the complaint the 2nd opposite party wrote a letter dated 10.1.2008 stated that Smt.M.Lakshmi a SB account holder of our branch has used your ATM to draw cash on 9.12.2007 she has informed that she had tried to draw Rs.15,000/- in the first instance and Rs.500/- on the next working day and requested her to claim the amount through proper channel. The said amount of Rs.15000/- was credited by the 1st opposite party with the 2nd opposite party only in the second week of April 2008 and immediately our bank had recredited the said amount of Rs.15,000/- in the account of the 2nd complainant on 19.4.2008 itself. Hence there is no deficiency in service or any unfair trade practice on the part of the 2nd opposite party and this complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 were marked on the side of the complainant. Proof affidavit of Opposite parties are filed and no documents was marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs sought for?.
6. POINTS 1 to 2 : -
Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, the written version filed by the opposite parties 1 & 2, and the proof affidavit filed by both parties, and the documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A10 filed on the side of complainant and considered the both side arguments.
7. Considering the both side case there is no dispute that the 2nd complainant is holding S.B account with debit card facility with 2nd opposite party the Canara bank Arakkonam Branch. The 1st opposite party bank is maintaining ATM booth at LB Road, Chennai. When the 2nd complainant attempted to withdraw a sum of Rs.15,000/- in the ATM at LB road Chennai maintained by 1st opposite party by using the said debit card, the amount was not delivered but she had received only the receipt as if the said amount withdrawn by the 2nd complainant. The complainant has stated that she has immediately approached the Branch Manager, Indian Bank, LB road regarding the same for enquiring for recredit the said amount in her account. However it was informed that this may be due to fault of the ATM machine, as per the statement the excess amount found will be made credited in the 2nd complainant account and she was asked to approach the 2nd op bank with whom the complainant is holding account. Accordingly the complainant also sent letter to the 2nd opposite party dated 11.12.2007 which is filed as Ex.A1 requesting the 2nd opposite party to re-credit the said amount of Rs.15,000/ in her SB account by furnishing the copy of the ATM withdrawal slip.
8. However the Ex.A2, Ex.A3, Ex.A4 are proves that as contended by the complainant despite of her approached opposite parties 1 & 2 and the communication sent the said amount was not re deposited in her account immediately but was credited only on 9.5.2008 only it is not disputed. Therefore complainant filed this complaint against the opposite parties making allegation that the delay in re-crediting the said amount in her account is negligent and failure on the part of opposite parties, even not following the Reserve bank circular dated July 17th 2009 filed Ex.A9 and paying and crediting a sum of Rs.100/- per day for the delay caused by them for the period after 12 days, within which the amount should be credited in the account of the complainant, as such the ops has committed deficiency of service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant, claiming compensation and litigation charges.
9. However considering that the complainant could not receive the amount from the ATM machine when she attempt to withdraw the said amount is due to the fault of the ATM machine which is beyond the control of 2nd opposite party who is in charging of operating the said machine. But despite of the complainant has informed the same to her banker i.e. 2nd opposite party by letter Ex.A1 dated 11.12.2007 itself and though there was a proof in Ex.A1 that the said letter was received by the 2nd opposite party on 11.12.2007 by affixing the bank seal they have not taken any immediate steps. But by email letter Ex.A2 dated 10.1.2008 only the 2nd opposite party has contacted the Indian bank with regard to the said complaint for taking action for recredit the amount. Further the 2nd complainant also approached the 1st complainant the Consumer Association in turn the said 2nd complainant have approached the opposite parties by sending a letter Ex.A4 dated 9.5.2008. After that only the 2nd opposite party has credited the said amount of Rs.15000/ in the 2nd complainant’s SB account on 9.5.2008 but the 2nd opposite party has not credited any amount towards the compensation for the delay caused in this aspect as per the circular of the Reserve bank of India Ex.A9. Further there is no proper explanation on the side of 2nd opposite party even in this proceedings for non compliance i.e. failure to re-credit the customer account within 12 working days from the date of receipt of complaint and non crediting the compensation amount of Rs.100/- per day in the account of the 2nd complainant.
10. Therefore we are of the considered view that as far as delay in re-crediting the amount debited in the account of the complainant which was not received by the complainant from the ATM due to mechanical defects the 2nd opposite party is alone responsible. As discussed above the 2nd opposite party though has received the complaint from the 2nd complainant regarding the same on 11.12.2007 itself and failure in their part in taking necessary action and re-crediting the said amount in the 2nd complainant’s account within 12 days i.e. on or before 22.12.2007 but the said amount was credited only on 9.5.2008 that is with delay of nearly 135 days (the period from 24.12.2007 to 8.5.2008 i.e. four month and 15 days). without crediting towards compensation for the above said five months of delay as per the Reserve bank circular / order. Therefore we are of the considered view that the said act of 2nd opposite party is amount to deficiency of service which also caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant is acceptable. Therefore the 2nd opposite party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.13,500/- (135 x 100) as compensation for failure to re-credit the said amount in the 2nd complainant account as per the Reserve Bank circular order. The 2nd opposite party is also liable to pay Rs.10,000/- as just and reasonable compensation for his suffering of mental agony and hardship and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- as litigation charges to the 2nd complainant. This compliant in respect of 1st opposite party is dismissed and as it is not responsible for the alleged grievance raised in the complaint by the complainants. Accordingly the points 1 & 2 are answered.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The 2nd opposite party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.13,500/- (Rupees thirteen thousand and five hundred only) as compensation towards delay in re-crediting the amount as per Reserve Bank circular order and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation towards mental agony and hardship and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) towards litigation charges to the 2nd complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the above amounts (Rs.13,500 + Rs.10,000/) will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order passed to till the date of realization and accordingly this complaint against the 1st opposite party is dismissed.
Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the 4th day of March 2016.
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents:
Ex.A1- 11.12.2007 - Copy of letter to opposite party-2.
Ex.A2- 10.1.2008 - Copy of letter to complainant- 2.
Ex.A3- 11.4.2008 - letter to complainant-1.
Ex.A4- 9.5.2008 - Copy of letter to opposite party-1.
Ex.A5- 10.5.2008 - Copy of letter to opposite party -1.
Ex.A6- 14.5.2008 - Copy of letter to opposite party
Ex.A7- 17.5.2008 - Copy of letter to complainant-1.
Ex.A8- 26.6.2008 - Copy of letter to opposite party-2.
Ex.A9- 17.7.2009 - Copy of RBI order
Ex.A10- 8.8.2009 - D.D.No.339416 for Rs.100/-
Opposite parties’ Exhibits:-
.. Nil ..
MEMBER-I MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
