Priya Kumari filed a consumer case on 28 Apr 2023 against The Regional Manager, SBI in the Bokaro Consumer Court. The case no is CC/135/2022 and the judgment uploaded on 29 Apr 2023.
Jharkhand
Bokaro
CC/135/2022
Priya Kumari - Complainant(s)
Versus
The Regional Manager, SBI - Opp.Party(s)
Preeti
28 Apr 2023
ORDER
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bokaro
Complainant’s case in brief is that she is maintaining account in the State Bank of India, Sector-IV Branch, B.S. City Bokaro, who was approached by the O.Ps. for credit card having limit of 1.5 lakh, accordingly she applied for it but on receipt of the credit card she came to know that limit is only Rs. 30,000/- hence she refused and not activated the credit card. Later on she received E-mail and call continuously through phone No. 8587025005, 8586028188 regarding payment of debited amount of Rs. 27,775/- through the card number 4335888406959292 in respect to housing on 05.01.2022. Further case is that after discussion with O.P. complainant lodged complaint with SBI Customer Care then she came to know that she became victim of cyber fraud, instead of the fact that she did not activated her card till date. Complainant was advised to lodge FIR with the Police accordingly SDE No. 3/22 dt. 15.03.2022 was entered but no action was taken by the O.Ps. On 29.04.2022 pleader notice was received by the complainant which was replied thereafter on 29.07.2022 notice of Lok Adalat, Civil Court, Ranchi was received to pay Rs. 46038/- to the Bank, in this way O.Ps. are harassing the complainant and there is deficiency on the part of O.Ps. Therefore, it is prayed to direct the O.Ps. to pay compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for mental agony, physical harassment and to pay Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant as litigation cost.
In spite of due service of notice O.Ps. have not appeared nor they have filed W.S. hence case is being proceeded without W.S.
In support of the case complainant has examined witness Kalyani Srivastawa witness No.1 and herself as witness No. 2. Witness No. 1 is the mother of the complainant and she states that complainant has ordered the credit card and what action she has done with it she could not say. Witness No. 2 is the complainant herself and she states about contents of the complaint petition.
On perusal of the entire materials available on the record it appears that annexure-1 & 2 is showing that the alleged credit card has been used for transaction amounting to Rs. 27,775/-. Though it is alleged by the complainant that said credit card has not been activated by her but except her statement there is no any other evidence to prove it or there is no any technical expert’s report to prove it. In absence of technical expert’s report we are unable to hold that said credit card has not been used by the complainant. Complainant has not offered before this Commission for examination of the credit card through technical expert. It is important to mention here that in the relief portion also there is no any prayer regarding transaction made through the credit card rather only compensation and litigation cost has been prayed. This fact also shows that complainant is having no grievance in respect to alleged transaction. Therefore, we are of the view that complainant has not proved her case for grant of relief as prayed. Accordingly this case is being dismissed with cost.
(J.P.N. Pandey)
President
(Baby Kumari)
Member
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.