Delhi

West Delhi

CC/15/680

SANGEETA - Complainant(s)

Versus

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK - Opp.Party(s)

15 Feb 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

 

CASE NO.  680/2015

MS. SANGEETA

ADD-3/147, JANAKPURI,

NEW DELHI-110058.                                                                        …..Complainant

VERSUS

THE MANAGER

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

ADD-A-3, BLOCK JANAKPURI,

NEW DELHI-110058…..Opposite Party-1

 

THE MANAGER

ING KOTAK-KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK,

B-BLOCK, COMMUNITY CENTRE,

NEAR SAI MANDIR, JANAKPURI,

NEW DELHI-110058.…..Opposition Party-2

O R D E R

 

PUNEET LAMBA, MEMBER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged that the complainant is maintaining saving account with OP and has ATM/Debit Card issued by OP. The complainant on 28.05.2015 operated ATM Machine of OP-2 for withdrawal a sum of Rs. 25,000/- but the ATM Machine was not functioning after cancelling the transaction the complainant received a message that a sum of Rs. 5,000/- had been debited from her account. Complainant again checked the ATM Machine and looked for the balance slip and the same was also reflected on the slip. The complainant immediately lodged complainant to the customer care of the OP-1. Thereafter, on 30^th May, 2015 the complainant received e-mail of closer of the complaint. Again, the complainant approached OP-1 who advised to register another complaint which was registered on 10.06.2015 but to no effect. On the advice of the OP-1 on 03.05.2017 the complainant lodged the complaint and on 07.07.2015 she received a message that the complaint has been closed successfully. It is alleged that the records showed the sum of Rs. 5,000/- had been withdrawn ING kotak Hauz-Khas, ATM whereas the complainant had never visited and she operated the ATM from District Centre, Janakpuri. It is alleged that the OP-1 could have confirmed from the CCTV Footage of ATM of OP-2 but due to their negligence and failure in acting promptly the complainant has suffered lose. Hence, there is deficiency of service on their part. It is alleged that the legal notice dated 10.08.2015 was served upon OPs but till date no redressal done. Hence, the present complaint for directions to OP-1 to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- disputed amount and a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards mental, agony, physical harassment and litigation expenses.

 After notice OP-1& OP-2 appeared and replied to the complaint taking preliminarily objections that the complainant has not approached with clean hands and filed complaint with mala-fide intention. It is averred that as per the relevant records on 28.05.2015 the complainant tried to attempt several transactions from the ATM of OP-2 which could not be completed as invalid amount was entered repeatedly by the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant 18:48:24 on 28.05.2015 entered a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for withdrawal and it was successful as per the records of OP-2. It is averred that the OP-1 duly intimated the complainant of the transaction through SMS which was admittedly received by the complainant. Hence, there is no cause of action against the OPs and prayed for the dismissal of the complaint. On merits, it is asserted that due to negligence of complainant who inputted the invalid at the ATM of OP-2 as a reason the transaction could not be completed but later on complainant entered a sum of Rs. 5,000/- which was dispensed from the ATM Machine and the transaction was successful as per the records. The SMS message of the same was immediately sent to the complainant which was admitted by her. It is averred that as per ATM replenishment-Cum Cash Verification report no excess amount found during daily tallying of the cash, hence no uncollected cash was left on the concerned date. It is averred that the Extract of ATM/EJ Log. showed detailed description of the transactions which reflected a sum of Rs. 5,000/- had been withdrawn. The extract of switch Log. showed that the transaction was successful and denied all other allegations of the complainant.  It is specifically contended a sum of Rs. 5,000/- has been withdrawn from the ATM ID IN64602 and the transaction was successful as per the records of OP-2. Hence, there is no deficiency on part of OPs and prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

Rejoinder to the reply of OPs filed by the complainant controverting the stand of OPs and reiterating the facts stated in the reply.

When the parties were asked to lead evidence, the complainant filed affidavit of evidence stating the contents of the complaint on oath and she relied on Annexure E-1 to E-8.

Despite opportunities to OP-1 & OP-2 to file affidavit of evidence but none put in appearance and neither filed evidence. Hence, were proceeded ex-parte vide order dated. 16.01.2017.

We have heard Counsel for parties and perused the records carefully and thoroughly.  

 From the perusal of the documents filed by OP-1 & OP-2, it is crystal clear that the transaction of the disputed amount on 28.05.2015 was shown successful as per switch transaction report. It is admitted that the ATM Card remains in the custody of the users.  The PIN code is also only known to the users.  No transaction can be carried out by the user without ATM Card along with PIN to which he/she is only privy to it.  In the present case also the ATM card was in possession of the complainant and the PIN number was only in her knowledge without which she could not have operated the ATM. Therefore, we are of the opinion that there is no deficiency in service on part of OPs.

Keeping in view the above observations and discussions, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency or negligence in services on the part of the OPs. Accordingly, the complaint has no merits and resultantly dismissed.

 

File be consigned to Record Room.

          Copy of order be given as per the rules.

          Announced this ________15TH________ February, 2019. 

 

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                                                               (K.S. MOHI)

     MEMBER                                                                                       PRESIDENT