Delhi

East Delhi

CC/250/2021

DIWAKAR MOHOD - Complainant(s)

Versus

STATE BANK OF INDIA - Opp.Party(s)

29 May 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. No.250/2021

 

 

	Diwakar Mohod 13/321, Trilokpuri, Delhi – 110019.	….Complainant
Versus
	State Bank of India, Trilokpuri, Delhi – 110091.	……OP

Date of Institution: 07.07.2021

Judgment Reserved on: 29.05.2023

Judgment Passed on: 29.05.2023

               

QUORUM:

Sh. S.S. Malhotra (President)

Sh. Ravi Kumar (Member)

Ms. Rashmi Bansal (Member)

 

 

Order By: Shri Ravi Kumar (Member)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

The Complainant has alleged the deficiency in service on the part of OP in not refunding Rs.40,000/- in his account which were un-authorizedly  withdrawn from ATM.

1.         The Complainant in his complaint has contended that he is maintaining account No.10082193478 with the OP. On 05.10.2019 a total amount of Rs.80,000/- by way of four withdrawals of Rs.20000/- each was made in his account un-authorizedly for which he lodged complaint on 05.10.2019 with the OP Bank. Subsequently, an amount of Rs.40,000/- was refunded in his account and the balance amount of Rs.40,000/- has not been refunded to him till date. He had made several requests to the OP however no reply has been given. Aggrieved by the same he has filed present complaint seeking following prayers:

• Direct the OP to duly look into the matter with foremost importance to take necessary steps to render the proper service to the Complainant and provide to the Complainant refund the amount of Rs.40,000/-
• Direct the OP to provide Rs.50,000/- as  compensation to the Complainant for the deficiency in service and mental harassment and agony.
• Direct the OP to pay the costs of litigation.
• Pass any such other/further order/orders as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.

Alongwith his complaint he has enclosed following documents:

1. Copy of letter dated 05.10.2019 addressed to OP. 
2. Statement of account for the period 04.01.2021 to 13.01.2021. 

2. Notice was  issued to OP and one Shri Namichand, Deputy Manager of OP appeared on 23.03.2022 and later on copy of the complaint was also received by the OP on 29.03.2022. Thereafter, no reply was filed by the OP and OP was proceeded ex-parte on 22.11.2022. The Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit without exhibiting any document. He has separately enclosed copy of his Statement of Account from 06.05.2020 to 30.06.2021.
3. This Commission has heard the argument of the Complainant. No arguments were put forth by the OP in their defence.
4. Before proceeding further it is observed by the Commission that the complaint filed by the Complainant is not clear and is full of ambiguities. Though he has stated that there was fraudulent withdrawal through ATM in his account of Rs.80,000/- on 05.10.2019 and he has enclosed copy of the letter filed before the Bank, however, alongwith his compliant he has filed only the statement of account pertaining to the period from 04.01.2021 to 13.01.2021.
5. Primary onus of proving the complaint lies on the Complainant by furnishing all the details supported by documentary evidence. The Complainant has neither filed statement of account of his Bank Account for the relevant period covering the date 05.10.2019 when alleged disputed transactions happened nor he has filed any document with regard the SMS received by him when his account was debited four times in one day by Rs.20,000/- each time on 05.10.2019.
6. Normally ATM Card has a limit fixed for withdrawal per day and Complainant has not explained as to how there was ATM withdrawal of Rs.80,000/- (by way of 4 withdrawals of Rs.20,000/- each) in his account in one day i.e. 05.10.2019 and what was his ATM withdrawal limit for each day.
7. The Complainant has relied upon the credit of Rs.40,000/- given by the OP on 4^th January, 2021. The alleged fraudulent transactions are dated 05.10.2019 and the credit of Rs.40,000/- is on 04.01.2021 i.e. after a gap of one year three months. This delay is also not explained as to how Complainant is relating the credit of Rs.40,000/- on 04.01.2021 with his complaint of alleged ATM withdrawal of Rs.80,000/- on 05.10.2019.
8. Thus neither Complainant has given all relevant facts in his complaint nor he has filed relevant documents in its support. He has just filed some documents which are not relevant and do not explain anything. Complainant has not diligently prosecuted his case despite of several opportunities available to him. He has also not marked any document as Exhibit alongwith his Evidence by way of Affidavit.

 

In view of the above the complaint filed by the Complainant is ambiguous/not clear nor the same is supported and co-related by relevant documents which would have enabled this Commission to examine the same properly and in view of the same the complaint filed by the Complainant is Dismissed.

 

Copy of the order be supplied/send to parties free of cost as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced on 29.05.2023