Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

438/2010

M.Ravoof Ali - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Senior Manager, Bank Of India & Others - Opp.Party(s)

K.V.Sudararajan

03 Jul 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   10.08.2010

                                                                        Date of Order :   03.07.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO. 438/2010

MONDAY THIS  3RD   DAY OF JULY 2017

 

M. Ravoof Ali,

No.76/47 First Cross Street,

C.I.T. Nagar,

Chennai – 35.                                            .. Complainant

                                        ..Vs..

 

1.  The Senior Manager,

Bank of India,

Usman Road Branch,

Chennai 600 017.

 

2. The Zonal Manager,

Bank of India,

17 Erra Balu Street,

Chennai 600 001.                                     .. Opposite party.

 

 

Counsel for Complainant         :    M/s. K.V. Sundararajan.   

Counsel for opposite party      :    M/s. P. Madhan  

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum 50,250/- as compensation in lieu of interest as per the RBI Guidelines for the wrong debit of Rs.14,500/- and also to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- for mental agony and to pay cost of the complaint.

 1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that he was the account holder of the opposite parties.    Accordingly the complainant swiped his ATM Card on 12.9.2008 at the ATM kept at the Branch office of  the1st opposite party for Rs.15,000/- but only a sum of Rs.500/- was dispensed.   On that day the complainant was having a balance of Rs.84,646/- and thus for the sum of Rs.15,000/- swiped, dispensing only Rs.500/- was great surprise to the complainant and debiting entire swiped amount of Rs.15,000/-.    The complainant further submit that he immediately approached the 1^st opposite party informed of the above and gave a complaint requesting to credit back his amount.  But in spite of several attempts for several months the said amount was not credited back to his account.   Accordingly the complainant sent a lawyer’s notice dated 15.2.2010 demanding both the opposite parties to restore the amount and pay compensation but still there was no action.    As such the act of the opposite party clearly amounts gross deficiency in service and thereby caused harassment, mental agony  and hardship to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2. The brief averments in Written Version of  the opposite parties    are as follows:

        The opposite parties state that the opposite parties deny all the allegations contained in the complaint except those which are specifically admitted herein and this opposite party puts the complainant to strict proof of each and every allegation.  It is true that the complainant swiped his debit card on 12.9.2008 at the ATM kept in the branch office of the 1^st opposite party for Rs.15,000/- but only a sum of Rs.500/- was dispensed.   It is false to allege that the complainant was having a balance of Rs.84,646/-.  The available balance in the account of complainant as on 12.9.2008 was Rs.70,146/-.    The opposite parties further state that immediately the non dispensing of money by the concerned ATM was brought to their knowledge they credited Rs.14,500/- in the account of the complainant on 14.7.2010 being the amount that was not dispensed.   The opposite parties also state that under which RBI guideline the banks are directed to pay Rs.50/- as compensation for each day of the delayed payment.   They further put the complainant to strict proof as to whether it is Rs.50/- or Rs.75/- as compensation since he has mentioned two different amounts.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed in limine.

3.      In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant had filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite parties not  filed and no document marked on the side of the opposite parties.  

 

4.   The point for the consideration is:  

 

 

Whether the complainant is entitled a sum of Rs.50,250/- as compensation in lieu of interest as per the RBI Guidelines for the wrong debit of Rs.14,500/- as prayed for ?

 

5.    ON POINT :-

 

           Heard both sides.  Perused the records.   The learned counsel for the complainant contended that on 12.9.2008 he swiped his ATM card  for a sum of Rs.15,000/- from his savings bank Account No.801910110000554.  But he received only a sum of Rs.500/- alone.  But the receipt  shows that a sum of Rs.15,000/- has been dispensed is admitted.   Further the learned counsel for the complainant contended that on 12.9.2008 his bank balance is Rs.84,646/- after deducting Rs.15,000/- his account shows Rs.70,146/-.  Immediately the complainant made a complaint through phone to the opposite party.  But the opposite party has not taken any action.  Hence the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice Ex.A3.  Thereafter the opposite party deposited a sum of Rs.14,500/- on 14.7.2010 in the account of the complainant.   As per RBI Guidelines if such wrong disbursement made the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.100/- per day after 12 working days (i.e.) such wrong dispensement shall be credited in the account of the complainant within 12 days.    In this case  a sum of Rs.14,500 /- has not been disbursed to the complainant  but withdrawn from the complainant’s account on 12.9.2008.  Even after repeated requests and demands the opposite party neglected to pay the amount.   But only on 14.7.2010, the opposite party credited only Rs.14,500/- to his account.  Hence the complainant is claiming a sum of Rs.15,250/- as compensation by way of interest and a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- towards mental agony with cost.

6.     The learned counsel for the opposite party contended that admittedly the complainant swiped his ATM card on 12.9.2008 for withdrawing a sum of Rs.15,000/-.  But only a sum of Rs.500/- alone disbursed by the ATM.  The contention of the opposite party is that the complainant has not informed the said fact to the opposite party and has not made any complaint to the opposite party till issue of Advocate Notice Ex.A3.  Immediately after receipt of the Advocate Notice the opposite party credited a sum of Rs.14,500/- into the account of the complainant.   But it is seen from the records that the complainant made repeated requests and demands with the bank authorities orally in-person and other manner known to the complainant is not denied by the opposite party.  The opposite party also admitted that as per  RBI Guidelines a sum of Rs.100/- shall be paid by the bank towards the wrongful disbursed.    But the complainant demanded only a sum of Rs.50/- per day.       Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the complainant is entitled a sum of Rs.50/- per day from 12.9.2008 to 14.7.2010 (i.e)  670 days  totaling  Rs.33,500/- and also compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant and the point is answered accordingly. 

        In the result the complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 to 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.33,500/- (Rupees Thirty three thousand and five hundred only)  and also compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) for mental agony and cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The above  amount shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.       

 

  Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  3^RD day  of  July 2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

 

Complainants” side documents:

Ex.A1-         -       - Copy of Complainant’s Bank Pass Book.

Ex.A2- 12.9.2008  - Copy of ATM Slip.

Ex.A3- 15.2.2010  - Copy of Complainant’s lawyer notice with Ack. card.

 

Opposite parties’ side document: -   

.. Nil..

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.