BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.237 of 2019

      Date of Instt. 04.07.2019

      Date of Decision: 23.01.2023

Kuldip Singh aged about   years son of Jodha Singh resident of 313 New Jaimal Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       State Bank of India, Branch Tanda Road, Near Janta Hospital,          Jalandhar through its Manager.

2.       State Bank of India, Civil Lines, Jalandhar (Main Branch)        through its Manager/Authorized Representative.

….….. Opposite Parties

          Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)   

Present:       Sh. Satnam, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

Sh. A. K. Arora, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.1 & 2.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant is having a saving bank account in the bank branch of OP. The complainant on 16-5-2018 at about 8.34 PM had withdrawn the amount of Rs.2000/- through ATM situated at Janta Hospital, Near Pathankot Byepass, Jalandhar. When the complainant withdrew the said amount, he telephonically received a such message of withdrawal on his mobile No 94178-76812. When the complainant left the ATM and went to some distance, he received another message on telephone that Rs.36000/- has been withdrawn from his account. Then the complainant immediately returned back to the ATM and got statement of account through ATM, which showed that the balance amount in his account was only Rs.1050/- instead of Rs.37,050/-. Then the complainant went to the P. S. Division No.8, Jalandhar and made the written complaint. That on 17-5-2018, the complainant went to the branch office of OP and stated the above said facts to the OP. Then the manager checked the CCTV footage which clearly showed that two unidentified persons were present there in the ATM and tried to forge/touch with the ATM. The complainant is having no fault in the said withdrawal. The bank is responsible for the said withdrawal as the security was not present that time in the ATM. Moreover, the OP has moral duty to procure the savings of her clients in his bank. But the bank has failed for the same due to negligence, carelessness. As per the instructions of the banking authority, one person can only withdraw the amount not more than Rs.25,000/- in a day through ATM from one account. The complainant also moved an application before the Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Tanda Road, Near Janta Hospital, Jalandhar dated 18.05.2019 regarding the withdrawal. Moreover, one complaint also moved by the complainant in Cyber Crime Branch Jalandhar. The complainant due to the act and conduct of the OP suffered huge monetary loss as well as physical and mental harassment, agony and tension and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to make the payment of the withdrawal amount. Further, OPs be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complainant is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present complaint, in view of the fact that the transaction no.4872 dated 16.05.2018 for Rs.36000.00, disputed by him is a successful transaction and the amount has been received by the complainant regarding the said transaction. It is further averred that there are two ATM machines installed at the premises in question from where the amounts have been withdrawn by the complainant. The complainant has withdrawn an amount of Rs.2000.00 from ATM bearing no.SINW004072002 on 16.05.2018 at 8:33 pm as per ATM Log. Further, the complainant has withdrawn amount of Rs.36000.00 from ATM bearing no.S5NE004072621 at 8:34 pm as per ATM log. Both the transactions are successful transactions. It is worthwhile to mention here that without applying the pin number with the ATM card, no transaction in the ATM can be allowed. The complainant has himself operated the ATM and has withdrawn the amount from the ATM by applying his PIN Number along with the ATM Debit Card and as such has no right whatsoever to allege that the amount of Rs.36000.00 withdrawn through the ATM Card has not been received by him, especially in view of the fact that the disputed transaction is successful as per the record maintained by the opposite parties in respect of the ATM in question from where the amount was withdrawn. It is not out of place to mention here that the complainant has blocked his ATM card on 18.05.2018 at 10:50 pm and not at the same time, when the alleged amount of Rs. 36000.00 has been withdrawn from the ATM in question. Had the amount of Rs.36000.00 not withdrawn by the complainant in respect of the transaction in question, the complainant would have immediately blocked the ATM Card after coming to know of the disputed transaction. The computerized detail regarding blockage of card maintained by the OP. Further, the complainant has not informed the OPs regarding the disputed transactions of Rs.36000.00. The Letter allegedly addressed to the State Bank of India, Tanda Road Branch was never received by the said branch and his forged and fabricated. No receipt whatsoever has been attached with the said letter showing the dispatch or receipt of said letter by the OPs. It is further averred that there is absolutely no cause of action in favour of the complainant to file the present complaint against the OPs. It is further averred that there is no deficiency of service or unfair trade practice on the part of answering opposite parties and that being so the complaint is liable to be dismissed with special costs. On merits, the factum with regard to maintain of saving bank account by the complainant with the OP is admitted and the fact regarding withdrawal of amount of Rs.2000/- from the ATM is also admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by the complainant very minutely.

6.                The complainant alleged that he is maintaining saving account in the bank branch of the OP and on 16.05.2018 at 08:30 PM, he had withdrawn the amount of Rs.2000/- through ATM. He received the message to this effect also, but after some time he received another message on telephone that Rs.36,000/- have been withdrawn from his account when he never used the ATM nor got withdrawn the amount. When he took statement from the bank, he found that Rs.36,000/- have been withdrawn. He has proved on record the application Ex.C-1, which was given to the Manager, State Bank of India regarding the withdrawal of the amount by some unknown person. As per this application, he has given the application on 19.05.2018, whereas the amount was withdrawn on 16.05.2018. He further proved an application Ex.C-2, which was given to the Incharge Cyber Crime Branch on 17.05.2018. He alleged that he immediately went to the Police Station Division No.8, but the application Ex.C-2 shows that written application was moved to Crime Branch on the next day i.e. 17.05.2018 and not on 16.05.2018. There is no application written to the Incharge Police Station, Division No.8 as alleged by the complainant, informing about the wrongly and illegally withdrawal of the money from the ATM. It has been alleged by the complainant that on 17.05.2018, the Manager checked the CCTV Footage, which clearly show that two unidentified persons were present there in the ATM, who tried to forge/touch with the ATM, but there is no record to this effect either filed by the complainant or by the OPs rather this fact has been denied by the OPs. As per the letter Ex.C-2, he has mentioned the fact that two unidentified persons were present in the ATM Room about 10-15 minutes prior to the withdrawal of the money and they were touching the ATM, but there is no reference of the fact that after withdrawal of the money by the complainant those unidentified persons remained present there.

7.                The OP has filed on record the statement Ex.OP/1, which shows that there was a transaction from the bank through ATM as alleged by the complainant. This transaction was done by the complainant, admitted by him, on 16.05.2018 at 20:35:50 and as per this transaction, the ATM card was inserted and PIN was also entered and there is a specific mention of the card number and the transaction in Ex.OP/1. The ATM ID number has also been mentioned. Perusal of Ex.OP/2 also shows that another transaction was done at 20:33:41 and again in this statement, ATM card was inserted and PIN was also entered. In this statement also, there is a specific mention of the card number and in Ex.OP-1 and Ex.OP-2, the transactions were successful as the code in both these transactions was shown ‘000’ and the transaction was successful. ATM ID card number has also been mentioned. Both Ex.OP/1 and Ex.OP/2 shows that these are two different IDs, which are situated on Tanda Road. As per the written statement, there are two ATM machines installed at the premises in question from where the amounts have been withdrawn by the complainant. This shows that two transactions were made from different ATM machines, which are situated in the same premises and as per Ex.OP/2, the denomination of the notes was of Rs.2000/- and total 18 notes were withdrawn. These transactions i.e. Ex.OP/1 and Ex.OP/2 were made and were successful only after the insertion of the ATM and entering the PIN, which was only in the knowledge of the complainant or another person informed about the PIN by the complainant only. As per Ex.OP/3, the card was blocked by the complainant on 18.05.2018 at 20:50:19. The limit for withdrawal upto 31.10.2018 was Rs.40,000/- through ATM cards, which was to be reduced to Rs.20,000/- w.e.f. 31.10.2018, meaning thereby that prior to 31.10.2018, upto Rs.40,000/- could be withdrawn through ATM cards. The complainant has not produced on record any telephonic message, which was allegedly received by him regarding the withdrawal of the money from his account through ATM. The complainant never approached the bank on 16.05.2018 when he allegedly received a message and came to know about the illegal withdrawal of the money, rather moved complaint and application before the Manager on 19.05.2018 i.e. after three days as per Ex.C-1. It was his duty to inform the bank immediately, so that the necessary action could have been taken by the bank on the same day. The fact regarding CCTV Footage allegedly shown to him by the branch manager has not been proved by the complainant. So, there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs and thus, the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

8.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

23.01.2023         Member                          Member           President