BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 04^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023

ORDER

SMT.M.SHOBHA, PRESIDENT

1. The complaint has been filed under Section 35 of C.P.Act (hereinafter referred as an Act) against the OP for the following reliefs against the OP:-
   1. Direct the OPs to refund a pay a sum of Rs.13,435/- along with interest at 24% p.a., till the date of realization and direct the Ops to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant as compensation for the deficiencies in services, breach of representations for mental agony and loss of income suffered by the complainant.
   2. Direct the Ops to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant as costs of this proceedings.
   3. Award any other appropriate relief.

2. The case set up by the complainant in brief is as under:-

The complainant is holding SB account bearing No.45711134589 in OP1 bank. During online transactions the complainant by mistake on 22.01.2020 made online transactions for sum of Rs.13,435/- through NEFT from his S.B. account to True Seasons, account No.0693102000003452 of the 2^nd OP.  Immediately on realizing the mistake he made call to the OP1 customer care and reported the complaint with regard to wrong transactions and also requested to recall the amount from the OP2 bank.

3. Thereafter the complainant sent email on 04.02.2020. the OP1 bank in reply instructed the complainant to raise with the OP2 bank and also instructed to support and assist with best service of all times.  

4. It is further case of the complainant that on raising complaint the OP1 bank informed the complainant that they had send a email to the branch manager of OP2 and requested to reverse and transfer the transaction amount to OP1 bank and further informed the complainant to contact after two to three days. The complainant as per the instruction of OP1 bank contacted the customer care on query with regard to transfer of amount but inturn they informed to contact OP2. The complainant contacted the OP2 bank but to his dismay he has got the information that no mail communication has been received by the OP1 bank with regard to transfer of the amount as on date.  The complainant visited the OP1 bank on March 2020 and contacted the branch manager.  The branch manager instead of solving the grievance misbehaved with the complainant.  

5. The complainant on following with the OP2 bank they informed the complainant to inform the OP1 bank to send a mail about wrong transactions and to transfer the amount. This fact was brought to the knowledge of OP1 bank but no action has been taken by the OP1.

6. The complainant has got issued a legal notice dated 10.08.2020 to OP2.  After receipt of the notice the OP1 send a reply with information that they have taken the matter with the OP2 bank. On receipt of the reply the complainant again contacted OP2 bank and he has fulfilled the conditions imposed by submitting indemnity bond from the OP1 bank with all processes.  But even on fulfilling all its requirements as on date have not refunded the amount to the complainant.

7. The OP2 made the complainant to move up and down for refund of money.  The OP2 manager has also created problem stating that the indemnity bond furnished is not in proper manner and the OP1 submitted the bond as required by the OP2. Even after submitting the bond by OP1, the OP2 failed to refund the amount.  Both the OPs have miserably created problems and failed to refund the amount.

8. At last the complainant has got issued another legal notice on 22.02.2021. After receipt of the notice the OP2 sent an untenable reply on 11.03.2021 and he has further insisted the complainant to lodge a police complaint against the account holder in which account the amount has been credited. The said account holder is a stranger to the complainant and hence he has not lodged any complaint.

9. The OPs not bother to refund the amount, all the efforts made by the complainant have proved futile except to approach this Commission.  Hence the complainant has filed this complaint.

10. After service of the notice, OP1 remained absent and placed exparte. The OP2 appeared before this Commission through counsel but failed to submit the version within 45 days and hence the version was rejected by this Commission.

11. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence and relies on 06 documents. 

12. Heard the arguments of advocate for the complainant.  Perused the written arguments filed by both the parties.

13. The following points arise for our consideration as are:-

1. Whether the complainant proves deficiency of service on the part of OP?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to relief mentioned in the complaint?
3. What order?

14. Our answers to the above points are as under:

Point No.1:  Negative

Point No.2: Negative

Point No.3: As per final orders

REASONS

15. Point No.1 AND 2: These two points are inter related and hence they have taken for common discussion.  We have perused the allegations made in the complaint and documents 1 to 6. Inspite of issue of notice the OP1 remained absent. Even though OP2 appeared has failed to file the version within 45 days and hence it was rejected. Hence OPs neither challenged the allegations made in the complaint and also documents and they remained unchallenged.

16. The complainant has filed his affidavit evidence reiterated all the allegations made in the complaint. He has relied on six documents.  Document No.1 is the copy of the account statement and document No.2 is the email communications, document No.3 to 6are the legal notice and reply notice exchanged between the complainant and OPs.

17. It is clear from the evidence and documents of the complainant that the complainant by mistake has transferred Rs.13,435/- through NEFT to True seasons account No.0693122000003452 of the OP2 bank account.  The complainant was supposed to make the payment to his land lord Smt.Usha Kiran Tiwari towards monthly rent but he has wrongly transferred the amount to a third person true seasons by mistake.

18. After that he has informed the OP1 and 2 bank and also issued legal notices and they have also issued the reply notices as document No.3 to 6, but the OP banks have failed to solve the problem of the complainant and they failed to reverse the amount of Rs.13,435/- to the complainant S.B. Account.  

19. It is clear from the reply notice issued by the OP2 that they have processed inward transactions based solely on account number information.  Hence they have not committed any mistake or error and they have followed all procedure as per their banking manuel. In furtherance of the same the OP2 bank had addressed a letter to the beneficiary account holder true seasons to provide debit authorization to reverse funds received from the complainant. But till today the beneficiary true seasons has not replied nor provided debit authorization to reverse the funds to the complainant account.  They have further advised to take proper legal action against the beneficiary for the recovery of the amount credited to his account.

20. The complainant in this case has not made the beneficiary true seasons as OP in this case.  The OP1 and 2 have no authority to reverse the amount without the permission of the beneficiary account holder. Inspite of the action taken by the OP2 bank the beneficiary true seasons have not come forward to refund the amount nor provided debit authorization to them to reverse the funds to the complainant’s account.

21. Under these circumstances the complainant has to take action against the beneficiary true seasons as they kept quite without giving any reply and without authorizing the OP2 bank to reverse the funds to the complainant account.

22. The complainant has not made the beneficiary true seasons as OP in this case and hence this Commission cannot issue any direction to the beneficiary to refund the amount or authorize the OP2 bank to provide debit authorization to reverse the fund to the complainant’s account.  Hence there is no negligence or deficiency of service committed by the OP1 and 2.  The mistake was committed by the complainant and he has to rectify it by filing complaint or initiating any legal action against the beneficiary true seasons. The complainant failed to establish the deficiency of service on the part of OP1 and 2.   Hence we answer point No.1 and 2 in the negative.

23. Point No.3:- In view the discussion referred above we proceed to pass the following;

O R D E R

1. The complaint is Dismissed. No costs.
2. Furnish the copy of this order and return the extra pleadings and documents to the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 04^TH day of FEBRUARY, 2023)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party2 – R.W.1;

NIL