The instant case was instituted on the basis of a petition under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by one Dipti Chowdhury, D/o Saifur Islam Chowdhury, resident of Khalsi, P.S.- Raiganj Dist.- Uttar Dinajpur which was registered as Consumer Case No. 55/18 in this Forum.

The fact of the case as revealed from the petition of complaint as well as from the evidence is that the complainant/ petitioner opened an account no-549502010004199 with the Union Bank of India, Raiganj Branch i.e O.P.No-1. Accordingly the O.P.No-1 issued a pass book in favour of the complainant. At the time of opening the said account the complainant was assured by the bank authority that all the transactions either manual or electronic ways are secured.

The complainant was in need of an ATM Card for which she requested before the bank authority for issuing an ATM Card in connection with her account. The O.P/Bank issued an ATM Card but at that time pin number regarding the ATM Card was not supplied to the complainant.

Unfortunately the complainant lost her ATM card from her custody and it has been further stated that before lost her ATM card she never used her ATM card at any point of time as because she never got any Pin Number regarding the ATM Card issued to her.

For non getting the Pin Number the complainant informed the matter to the Bank that is O.P.No-1 and the complainant requested the bank authority to block her ATM Card. At that time the O.P.No-1 requested her to meet with O.P.No-2 that is The ATM Manager of Union Bank of India. Accordingly, the complainant met with the O.P.No-2 and informed the matter. At that time the O.P.No-2 assured her that her ATM Card will be automatically blocked.

On 08/04/2018 the complainant for her own need check her balance in the account and on checking the account she was shocked on perusal of the pass book that Rs.4000/- on 05/01/2017, Rs.200/- on 09/01/2017, Rs.5000/-+Rs.4000/-=9000/- on 25/12/2017 and Rs.100/- on 28/12/2017 have been withdrawn total amounting to Rs.13300/-. After updating the pass book she immediately contacted with the bank and the bank authority assured her that the bank authority will look into the matter.

Thereafter, several requests were made to the bank authority by the complainant but ultimately there was no fruitful result. As such on 02/07/2018 the complainant sent a lawyer notice to the O.P.No-1. After receiving the said notice the O.P.No-1 did not give any reply. As such finding no other alternative the complainant has come before this forum with a prayer for directions upon the Bank Authority to pay the amount of Rs.13300/- along with interest and compensation of Rs.5000/- for mental pain and agony and for any other reliefs.

The petition has been contested by the Bank Authority by filing the W.V denying all the material allegations as labeled against the Bank Authority contending inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable in his present form and the case is bad for non joinder of necessary parties and the case is also barred by law of limitation.

The definite defence case is that at the time of issuing ATM Card, Pin Number was in the Ready Kit packet and the complainant received the said Ready Kit by putting her signature.

The further defence case is that the complainant did not lodge any FIR to the Police Station or to the Bank about the lost of her ATM Card. The bank Authority has no scope to note the Pin Number to the ATM Card.

The further defence case is that the complainant did not make any prayer for preservation of CCTV footage, so the CCTV footage was destroyed after the lapse of 90 days. Considering such facts and circumstances the instant case is liable to be dismissed with cost.

 In order to prove the case the complainant Dipti Chowdhury was herself examined as PW1 and she was cross examined and she filed some documents. On the other hand Pintu Sinha was examined as OPW 1 and no one cross examined him as the Ld. Lawyer was not found present at that time.

Now the point for determination as to whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief from this forum or not?

                                                                  D E C I S I O N  W I T H  R E A S O N S:

At the time of the argument the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant argued that the complainant opened an account with the O.P.No-1 that is Union Bank of India and on the request of the complainant ATM Card was issued after the opening of the account but the Pin Number was not given to the complainant. The Ld. Lawyer of the complainant further argued that the complainant lost her ATM Card and she informed the matter to the O.P.No-1 & 2 to block her ATM Card but on 08/04/2018 after updating the pass book she found that Rs.13,300/- has been withdrawn from her account through ATM. According to the argument as advanced by the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant is that the Pin Number was not given to the complainant. So, how the complainant can use the ATM Card without Pin Number? So, something was wrongly done for which the complainant is not at all liable and the Bank Authority is liable for that reason. In reply the Ld. Lawyer of the O.P argued that the Pin Number was handed over on the date of opening of the pass book. The pass book was opened on 01/09/2014 and on the same date the Pin Number was handed over to the complainant. In this regard the Bank Authority has filed the Xerox copy of the receipt showing that the Pin Number was handed over to the complainant. But in this regard The Ld. Lawyer of the complainant submitted that in the register there is no mention that Pin Number was handed over to the complainant. In this regard the Ld. Lawyer of the O.P submitted the master circular on ATM and Debit Cards. In the case of Ready Kit, the PIN is kept along with the Card which is inactive. According to the rule Pin Number is separately mailed / handed over to the customer by the bank in case of personalized cards. According to the argument the concept of Ready Kit is designed to reduce the lead time for card activation and bypass the issues like courier delays and non delivery / wrong delivery due to incomplete / incorrect address. The Ready Kit contains an inactivated Debit Card and sealed PIN with the card number printed on it, as and when it is found that the complainant received the card number. So, it indicates that the Pin Number was delivered along with the Ready Kit. So, the argument as raised by the Ld. Lawyer of the complainant that Pin Number was not delivered to the complainant is not at all believable. Moreover, the complainant did not lodge any complaint either to the Bank or to the Police Station that on 05/01/2017 Rs.4000/-, was withdrawn and lastly on 28/12/2017 Rs.100/- was withdrawn and total amount was withdrawn to the tune of Rs.13,300/-. It is not understood why the complainant waited till 08/04/2018 for updating the pass book when the last withdrawn/transaction was made through ATM Card on 28/12/2017. Such delay raised a strong suspicion as to the genuinity of the claim. Moreover, the Pin Number is a secret number. Only the customer will have access the Pin Number in which the Bank Authority has no access to the Pin Number. Moreover, the matter was informed to the Bank Authority on 02/07/2018 through her lawyer when the Bank Authority came to know from the Lawyer notice dated 02/07/2018 that her ATM Card was lost. Already 90 days have been lapsed, so the CCTV Footage is not possible to preserve. According to the rule of CCTV Footage of an ATM Counter can be preserved for 90 days. So, considering such facts and circumstances the instant case is liable to be dismissed.

C.F. paid is correct,

Hence, it is,

                               O R D E R E D:

 That the complainant case being No. CC-55/18 be and the  same is dismissed against the O.Ps but without any cost.

Let a copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost on proper application.