By Jayasree Kallat, Member: The complaint was filed on 4-7-2007. The complainant was an S.B. Account holder in the branch office in which the opposite party is the branch manager. Recently the complainant was provided with an A.T.M. card No.5049937028500019832 by the State Bank of Travancore. After opening the S.B. Account the complainant had deposited a total amount of Rs.46000/- in her S.B. account. The complainant had not withdrawn any amount from the bank by using cheque or the A.T.M. Card. The complainant did not know how to draw cash by using A.T.M. card. On 18-3-2007 the complainant along with her husband went to the A.T.M. of State Bank of Travancore at Nadakkavu to take a mini statement of the S.B. account of the complainant. When they received the statement of the S.B. account they were surprised to see that there was a withdrawal of Rs.10000/- from the complainant’s account on 16-1-2007. The complainant had not withdrawn any amount from her account. Complainant informed this matter to the opposite party. The opposite party did not respond to the complaints of the complainant. The opposite party did not cheque the records of the S.B. account with the bank. The opposite party has not refunded the amount illegally shown as withdrawn from the S.B. account, nor did the O.P. reply to the legal notice sent by the complainant. The complainant has alleged deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party. The complainant has filed the petition seeking to get back Rs.10000/- which the opposite party has illegally withdrawn from the complainant’s S.B. account along with interest and compensation. Opposite party filed a version denying the averments in the complaint other than those which are expressly admitted. The opposite party admitted that the complainant is having S.B. account with the opposite party and she had deposited Rs.15000/- on 20-12-2006, 5000/- on 15-1-07, Rs.10000/- on 17-1-07 and Rs.16000/- on 8-2-07 into the S.B. Account. Opposite party denies that the complainant does not know to operate the A.T.M. and also that she has not drawn any amount from the bank using cheque. The complainant had collected the secrete pin code from the branch on 15-1-2007. The complainant had used her own A.T.M. card and secrete pin for withdrawing the amount. The bank is not liable to pay any amount withdrawn by the complainant from her own account using her own A.T.M. card and secrete pin by the complainant herself. The complainant has not suffered any mental agony. The opposite party is liable to get compensation from the complainant. O.P. prays to dismiss the petition. The only point for consider is whether the complainant is entitled for any relief sought in the petition? Complainant was examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 and A2 were marked on complainant’s side. RW1 was examined and Ext.B1 to B3 were marked on O.P’s side. The case of the complainant is that she had a S.B. account in the branch office of the opposite party. She was provided with an A.T.M. card of S.B.T. She had deposited Rs.46000/- in to her S.B. account. Complainant had not withdrawn any amount from the above said account. The complainant did not know how to use A.T.M. card. Hence on 18-3-07 complainant along with her husband went to the A.T.M. of State Bank of Travancore located at Nadakkavu to take a mini statement of the S.B. account. When the complainant received the mini statement of the S.B. account she was surprised to see that there was a withdrawal of Rs.10000/- from her account on 16-1-2007. As the complainant did not withdraw any amount from her account after opening the S.B. account she informed the opposite party about the withdrawal of Rs.10000/- without her knowledge. The opposite party has taken the stand that the withdrawal was done by the complainant herself. The definite case of the complainant is that she has not withdrawn any amount from the S.B. account after opening the same account. RW1 was examined on opposite party’s side. RW1 has stated that on 16-1-07 an amount of rs.10000/-was withdrawn from the A.T.M. counter situated in Court Road, Calicut. He has also admitted that the A.T.M. counter is computer controlled and there are hardwares and softwares in the Computer. If any one of the two becomes defective the computer also becomes defective. Computer hang means that the computer does not respond to the commands. RW1 has also admitted that there were incidents where money was not received while A.T.M. transaction. Even though RW1 has definitely stated that the complainant has withdrawn Rs.10000/- from the A.T.M. counter using her A.T.M. card, he has also admitted that there were complaints from many of the bank branches regarding A.T.M transactions. The opposite party was not able to prove concretely that the complainant had withdrawn Rs.10000/- on 16-1-2007 by using A.T.M. card. O.P. has produced Ext.B3 and it shows that from the A.T.M. counter, Court Road Rs.10000/- withdrawn. It is the word of the RW1 that when 000 is shown as the RESP.CODE. It shows that transaction was successful. But it does not prove that the complainant herself has withdrawn the money. In our opinion there is no cause to disbelieve the complainant that she had opened a S.B. account and received an A.T.M. card and when she went to the A.T.M. counter to learn about the operation of the A.T.M. card she had taken the mini statement in which it was stated that an amount of rs.10000/- was withdrawn from her S.B. account. RW1 has admitted that complaints are lodged regarding A.T.M. in many of the branches of the bank. The complainant had approached the opposite party complaining about the illegal withdrawal of Rs.10000/- from her S.B. account and requested O.P. to give her statement regarding her account .The opposite party had informed her that the server was blocked. After hearing both sides the Forum has come to the conclusion that due to the deficiency of the opposite party money was illegally withdrawn from the S.B. account of the complainant without her knowledge. Hence we are of the opinion that the complainant is entitled to get back Rs.10000/-. In the result the petition is allowed and the opposite party is directed to refund Rs.10000/- to the complainant along with a compensation of Rs.1000/- and a cost of Rs.500/- within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Pronounced in the open court this the 30th day of July 2010. Date of filing:04.07.2007 SD/-PRESIDENT SD/-MEMBER SD/-MEMBER APPENDIX Documents exhibited for the complainant: A1.Original of ATM transaction record dtd. 18.03.07 . A2. Registered Lawyer notice dtd. 23.03.07. Documents exhibited for the opposite parties: B1.Withdrawal receipt dtd. 16.01.07. B2. Copy of SB Account ledger. Dtd. 24.03.08. B3. Withdrawal receipt dtd. 16.01.07. Witness examined for the complainant: PW1. Bindu Anoop (Complainant) Witness examined for the opposite party: RW1. P.M.Babu, Currency Administration cell Manager,SBI Malaparamba. Sd/- President //True copy// (Forwarded /By order) SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
| | [HONOURABLE MRS. Jayasree Kallat, MA.,] Member[HONOURABLE MR. G Yadunadhan, BA.,LLB.,] PRESIDENT[HONOURABLE MR. L Jyothikumar, LLB.,] Member | | 
