| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA C.C.No. 96 of 26-4-2019 Decided on : 31-10-2023 Kikkar Singh aged about 52 years S/o Bakhtawar Singh, R/o C/o Village Bureau, Punjab Police Room No.242, Mini Secretariat, Bathinda. ........Complainant Versus HDFC Bank Ltd., 3027-B, Guru Kanshhi Marg, Near Bus Stand, Bathinda through its Branch Manager. .......Opposite party Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 QUORUM Sh. R.L Mittal, President Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member Present : For the complainant : Sh. S.R. Sharma, Advocate. For opposite party : Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Advocate. ORDER R.L Mittal, President The complainant Amanpreet Singh (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against M/s Raja Motors (here-in-after referred to as opposite party). Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is holding Account number 01871050127505 with the opposite party and is also holding ATM Card for operating the aforesaid account. On 1.2.2019, the complainant was having a credit balance of Rs.38,493.00 in the aforesaid account of the complainant and out of need of money i.e. Rs.8,000/-, the complainant tired to withdraw a sum of Rs.8000/- from the said account of the complainant through ATM from the ATM Machine of the opposite party installed near Gurudwara Kalgidhar Sahib, Multania Road, Bathinda but however the machine did not disburse any amount of Rs.8000/- to the complainant although the account of the complainant was debited with Rs.8000.00 vide transaction No. NWD 416021XXXXXX3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216018572 and thereafter the complainant again tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the second attempt but again the ATM Machine did not disburse the said amount of Rs.8000/- to the complainant although the account of the complainant was again debited with Rs. 8000.00 vide transaction No. NWD-416021xxxxxx3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216018618 and thereafter in the third attempt, the amount of Rs.8000.00 was disbursed by the Machine to the complainant vide transaction No. NWD-416021xxxxxx3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216019776 and the said amount of Rs.8000.00 was again debited in the account of the complainant and in this way, the ATM Machine disbursed only Rs.8,000/- to the complainant in the third attempt but debited Rs.24,000/- in the account of the complainant i.e. Rs.16,000/- in excess and the said entries also find mention in the passbook. It is alleged that the complainant lodged the complaint with the opposite party on 1.2.2019 itself and the concerned officials of the opposite party assured the complainant that the account of the complainant will be over -hauled by the banking system within a week and the complainant needs not to worry and assured that the amount of Rs.16,000/- will be credited back in the account of the complainant. The complainant also lodged a complaint with the opposite party on 5.2.2019 vide complaint No.1814785 Chandigarh but the opposite party credited only a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the account of the complainant and the remaining amount of Rs.8000.00 was not credited in the account of the complainant despite repeated requests of the complainant and as such the complainant again lodged a complaint No. MOHCO319002968 on 18.2.2019 but to no effect rather the opposite party kept on putting the matter off under one or the other false pretext and the said amount of Rs.8000.00 has not been credited in the account of the complainant although a period of more than two months has already lapsed. It is further alleged that due to the above said act of the opposite party, the complainant is suffering from great mental tension,agony, botheration, and such the complainant is also entitled to credit of the said amount of Rs.8000/- in the account of the complainant and the complainant is also entitled to the compensation to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses. There are gross deficiency in service on part of the opposite party and further the opposite party adopted unfair trade practices and such complainant has right to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Forum. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to credit a sum of Rs.8000/- in the account of the complainant with immediate effect. The opposite party may also be directed to pay compensation to the complainant to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses. Upon notice, opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written written reply raising legal objections that complaint is not maintainable against the opposite party as complainant is guilty of concealment of material facts from this Hon'ble Forum because complainant has already been refunded all the entries regarding ATM because as on 07.02.2019 first entry of refund of Rs. 8,000/- was made and thereafter as per procedure from further investigation second entry of refund was made on 30.04.2019 which is dully reflected in the statement of account of complainant and as such the present complaint has already become infructuous and cannot proceed further nor there is any deficiency on part of opposite party rather as per procedure the grievance of complainant was looked into and was solved as per data available. On merits, opposite party has reiterated their version as taken in the legal objection as detailed above and controverted all other averments of the complainant and prayed for dismissal of complaint. In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 23.4.2019 (Ex. C-1) and photocopy of account statement (Ex.C-2). In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, the opposite party has tendered into evidence affidavit of Mukesh Kumar, Branch Head dated 16.6.2019 (Ex. OP-1/1) and account statement (Ex. OP-1/2). Learned counsel for parties have reiterated their stand as taken in their respective pleadings as detailed above. We have given careful consideration to these submissions. The main grievance of the complainant is that complainant tired to withdraw a sum of Rs.8000/- from the said account of the complainant through ATM from the ATM Machine of the opposite party installed near Gurudwara Kalgidhar Sahib, Multania Road, Bathinda but however the machine did not disburse any amount of Rs.8000/- to the complainant although the account of the complainant was debited with Rs.8000.00 vide transaction No. NWD 416021XXXXXX3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216018572 and thereafter the complainant again tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the second attempt but again the ATM Machine did not disburse the said amount of Rs.8000/- to the complainant although the account of the complainant was again debited with Rs. 8000.00 vide transaction No. NWD-416021xxxxxx3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216018618 and thereafter in the third attempt, the amount of Rs.8000.00 was disbursed by the Machine to the complainant vide transaction No. NWD-416021xxxxxx3850-01540036 Bathinda 903216019776 and the said amount of Rs.8000.00 was again debited in the account of the complainant and in this way, the ATM Machine disbursed only Rs.8,000/- to the complainant in the third attempt but amount of Rs.24,000/- was debited from the account of the complainant i.e. Rs.16,000/- in excess and the said entries also find mention in the passbook.The complainant lodged the complaint with the opposite party on 1.2.2019 itself and the concerned officials of the opposite party assured the complainant that the account of the complainant will be over-hauled by the banking system within a week and the complainant needs not to worry and assured that the amount of Rs.16,000/- will be credited back in the account of the complainant. The complainant also lodged a complaint with the office of opposite party in Chandigarh on 5.2.2019 vide complaint No.1814785 but the opposite party credited only a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the account of the complainant and the remaining amount of Rs.8000.00 was not credited in the account of the complainant despite repeated requests of the complainant. The opposite party has admitted that on 7.2.2019 first entry of refund Rs.8,000/- was made and thereafter as per proceedure from further investigation second entry of refund was made on 30.4.2019. From this, it becomes clear that the first wrong entry was refunded within the prescribed time but second entry was made after 90 days. As per the guidelines issued by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) No. RBI/2019-20/67 DPSS.CO.PD.No.629/02.01.014/2019/20 dated 20.9.2019. It has been laid down as below:- Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) including Micro-ATMs | Customer's account debited but cash not dispensed. | Pro-active reversal (R) of failed within maximum of T+5 days. | Rs.100/- per day of delay beyond T+5 days, to the credit of the account holder. |
From above it is evident that the second entry has been made with delay of 84 days. Thus, as per above guidelines the bank has to pay Rs.100 per day as delay. Since, the second entry of Rs.8,000/- has already been refunded. So, for the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted against opposite party. Opposite party is directed to pay Rs.8,400/- to the complainant for the delay 84 days as per guidelines of RBI. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room. Announced:- 31-10-2023 - (R.L Mittal)
President (Shivdev Singh) Member
| |
