| Final Order / Judgement | DATE OF FILING : 12-05-2015 DATE OF S/R : 05-06-2015 DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 26-07-2016 Debasis Mondal son of Dilip Mondal, South Shanpur Bhagban Das Math, Dasnagar, Howrah 711105…………………………………….……….. COMPLAINANT. 1. State Bank of India Belilious Branch, 158/6, Belilious Road, Howrah 711101. 2. State Bank of Mysore Bentinck Street Branch, 1 and 2 Old Court House Corner, Tobacco House, Kolkata 700001.....……………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES. P R E S E N T Hon’ble President : Shri B. D. Nanda, M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS. Hon’ble Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha. Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak. F I N A L O R D E R - Complainant, Debasis Mondal, by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.ps. to credit a sum of Rs. 24,000/- in the complainant’s savings bank A/c no. 20055083701 at State Bank of India, Belilious Branch, Howrah, to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for harassment and gross negligence and to pay interest @ 12% p.a. on the aforementioned amount of Rs. 24,000/- till realization along with cost of proceedings.
- Brief facts of the case is that complainant is the holder of one ATM-cum-Debit Card being No. 6220180341200013009 with respect to his savings bank A/c No. 20055083701 held with O.P. no. 1 since 2010. O.P. no. 1 also deducts service charge for the said card from the complainant’s Savings bank A/c. On 02-04-2014, complainant got two SMS at 15:27 and 15:28 at his mobile number wherefrom he came to know that on amount of ₹ 24,000/- has been withdrawn from his said savings bank A/c vide two ATM withdrawal transactions being a) TXN No. 1496 and 1497 dt. 02-04-2016 vide statement of the said savings bank A/c. But he did not withdraw the said amount and the ATM Card was lying with him at that particular point. He also stated that he never disclosed the PIN number to anyone. More surprisingly, the said amount was withdrawn from one ATM counter which is situated at Belapur, Mumbai, and the code no. of that ATM counter is ID S10C400524001, Belapur. Immediately, complainant, informed O.P. no. 1 about such unauthorized withdrawal vide Annexure complainant letter dt. 02-04-2014. He also lodged one diary with Bantra P.S being GDE No.133/2014 dt. 02-04-2014. Thereafter, complainant repeatedly requested O.P. no. 1 to credit the said amount to his savings bank A/c but the o.p.s did not take any step which caused tremendous mental agony, physical harassment and financial loss to him. After many attempts made by the complainants to the office of O.P. no. 1, O.P.1 replied vide their letter dt. 04-08-2014 stating therein that matter is lying with their controller and they cannot do anything in this respect. So, he also lodged one complaint with ‘Public Grievances’ Portal cell on 03-12-2014 against O.P.1. And from the documents sent by the said authority, it appears that the said ATM counter of Belapur, Mumbai, is of O.P. no. 2. But the refund of money was not done by either O.P. no. 1 or O.P. no. 2 till date. It is alleged by the complainant that due to poor security system of both the O.Ps. with respect to the ATM machines as well as the ATM counters held by O.Ps., complainant has been facing a financial loss till date. So, being frustrated and finding no other alternative alleging deficiency in service on the part of both O.Ps., complainant has filed this instant case with the aforesaid prayers.
- Notices were served. Both the O.Ps. appeared and filed any written version. Accordingly, the case was heard on contest against both the O.Ps.
- Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
- Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS : - We have carefully gone through W/V filed by both O.Ps. along with Annexures and noted their contents. It is the specific plea of O.P.1 that without the card and PIN number, no transaction can be a successful one and the safe custody of ATM Card and PIN is the primary responsibility of the card holder for which O.P. no. 1 cannot be held responsible. And as per their internal investigation, both the transactions were successful. Even O.P. no. 1 vide their letter dated 01-01-2015, has suggested the complainant to take up the matter with police for obtaining video footage . Here we take a pause. For giving ATM service, a service charge is being deducted by O.P. no. 1 from the complainant’s respective savings bank A/c. Even then, for an unauthorized withdrawal of money from ATM counter, complainant is being suggested to take up the matter with police. Is it not the duty of O.P.1 to give proper redressal to its customer, herein, the complainant. It is not the case of the complainant that he lost the card in question. Rather at the material point of time, the card was lying with him. And he was also in Howrah while the transactions were made at Belapur, Mumbai. On that day, that is, on 02-04-2014, he himself submitted the complaints under his signature before O.P. no. 1 and Bantra Police which can be very well verified by us from his signatures that are appearing in the instant complaint petition filed on 12-05-2016 before this Forum and the letters written to O.P. no. 1 and Bantra P.S. on 02-04-14. It is to be noted that quite often, we come across this kind of complaints filed by the consumers praying for the refund of unauthorizedly deducted amount by the banking authority. People depose their utmost faith with the banks. They are the custodian of the peoples’ hard earned money. It is not at all the luxury on the part of a common person to file a vague petition and thereafter to make rounds around the consumer Forum keeping aside their day to day job. If the o.p.s are taking the service charge from the customers, they are to provide proper service, so that people should not suffer for their deficiency in providing service. Here, the amount is also quite big. But due to the utter negligence on the part of O.P. no. 1 and O.P. no. 2, complainant has been facing extreme mental pain, physical harassment and financial loss. O.P. no. 2 as an associate of O.P. no. 1, has made a simple denial of the allegations of the complainant. So we are of candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers of the complainant should be allowed against both the o.ps.
Points under consideration are accordingly decided.. Hence, O R D E R E D That the C. C. Case No. 182 of 2015 ( HDF 182 of 2015 ) be allowed on contest with costs against the O.Ps. That the O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to credit a sum of Rs. 24,000/- in the complainant’s savings bank A/c no. 20055083701 at State Bank of India, Belilious Branch, Howrah, within one month from the date of this order. That the O.Ps. are jointly and severally further directed to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs. 3,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as litigation costs. That the O.Ps. are jointly and severally directed to pay the entire amount of Rs. 29,000/- to the complainant within one month from the date of this order i.d., the aforesaid amount shall carry an interest @ 8% per annum till full realization. The complainant is at liberty to put the final order into execution after expiry of the appeal period. Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs. DICTATED & CORRECTED BY ME. ( Jhumki Saha) Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah. | |
