Punjab

Faridkot

CC/18/92

Veena Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

State Bank of Patiala - Opp.Party(s)

Vipan Kumar Tayal

24 Sep 2019

ORDER

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :          92 of 2018

Date of Institution :     30.05.2018

Date of Decision :        24.09.2019

Veena Rani aged about 53 years wife of Ramesh Kumar resident of Street No.7 (R), Balbir Avenue, Faridkot Tehsil and District Faridkot.

Versus

 

1. State Bank of Patiala now merged with State Bank of India situated at KNJ School Branch, Faridkot through its Branch Manager.
2. OBC Bank Branch Kotkapura Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

..........OP

 

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

                                         

Quorum:     Sh Ajit Aggarwal, President,

Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

Present:       Sh Vipan Tayal, Ld Counsel for Complainant,

 Sh Simar Vijay Singh, Ld Counsel for OP-1,

 Sh Sandeep Tayal, Ld Counsel for OP-2.

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                      Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to them to refund or credit the amount of Rs.8,000/-illegally deducted from her account on 19.04.2018 with interest and for

cc no.-92 of 2018

further directing OP to pay Rs.70,000/-on account of compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by her besides litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-.

2                                                Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that she holds an account bearing no. 55144643144 in the bank of OP-1 and on 19.04.2018, she received a message on her mobile regarding debit of Rs.8000/-from her account. She immediately approached OP-1 alongwith her son and enquired about the said deduction of Rs.8000/-, but OP-1 did not give any satisfactory reply. Complainant again approached OP-1 to know about the illegal withdrawal from her account and gave written complaint for verification about said deduction. On this OP-1 assured to verify the reason for said deduction within few days.  On 30.04.2018, she again approached OP-1 alongwith her son to ask about said illegal debit of Rs.8,000/-from her account, but OP-1 did not pay any heed to her genuine requests, rather insulted her by using foul language. She served legal notice to OPs through her counsel, but that also bore no fruit. All this act and conduct of OPs has caused harassment to her, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs. Complainant also prayed for compensation and litigation expenses along with main relief. Hence, the complaint.

3                                                        Ld Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 5.06.2018,

 

cc no.-92 of 2018

complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                    On receipt of the notice, OP-1 filed written statement wherein asserted that complaint filed by complainant is entirely misconceived, groundless and unsustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be dismissed. it is averred that it is an abuse of process of law and complainant has no locus standi to file the same. Complainant has not come to the Forum with clean hands and has concealed the material facts from this Forum. It is filed only to harass, humiliate and to extract undue monetary benefits from answering OP. It is further averred that it involves complicated questions of law and facts requiring voluminous evidence, which is not possible in summary proceedings of this Forum. Complainant has not disclosed the real facts and suppressed the real facts. It is brought before the Forum that on 14.04.2018, complainant withdrew Rs.8,000/- by using her ATM Card bearing no.459203xxxx4075 at the ATM of OP-2 between 10.00 a.m. to 10.10 a.m. and said  transaction was successful and moreover, JP Log produced by OP-2 also proves this fact. Complainant has filed wrong complaint to extract money from them. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1. All the other allegations are denied being wrong and incorrect and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

5                                 OP-2 also filed reply through counsel where they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect

cc no.-92 of 2018

and asserted that complaint is liable to be dismissed as complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum and moreover, complainant is not their consumer and therefore, complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that on 14.04.2018, complainant used her ATM Card No.459203xxx75 and withdrew Rs.8000/-. Said transaction was successful and this fact is clear from the perusal of JP Log. There is no deficiency in service on their part. Prayer for dismissal of complain with costs is made.

6                                           Parties wanted to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings and proper opportunity was given to them. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-8 and then, closed his evidence.

7                                      In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Counsel for OP-1 tendered in evidence affidavit of Simranjit Singh Ex. OP-1/1 and documents Ex OP-1/2 to Ex OP-1/3 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of OP-1. Ld Counsel for OP-2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Rajinder Kumar Chahraya Ex OP-2/1 and document Ex OP-2/2 and then, closed the same on behalf of OP-2.

8                                  From the careful perusal of record and evidence and documents placed on record by respective parties, it is observed that grievance of complainant is that OPs wrongly debited Rs.8000/-from her saving account though she neither withdrew any amount from her account

cc no.-92 of 2018

nor she gave any instructions to bank to debit the amount in dispute from her account. As per complainant, despite repeated requests, OPs did not refund the amount of Rs.8,000/-wrongly debited by them from her account. On the other hand, plea taken by OP-1 and 2 is that complainant herself withdrew the amount of Rs.8000/-from the ATM of OP-2 situated in Kotkapura by using her ATM Card bearing no.459203xxxx4075. Document Ex OP-2/2 placed on record is copy of JP log which is produced before the Forum by OP-2 and it fully proves this fact that complainant used her ATM card for making withdrawal of Rs.8000/-from her account. Version of OP-1 and OP-2 further clears the point that transaction for withdrawal of Rs.8000/- was made by complainant from the ATM of OP-2 and amount was successfully drawn from ATM.  OPs brought before the Forum that amount in question has not been wrongly debited from the account of complainant, rather it has been debited on account of withdrawal made by complainant herself.         

9                                From the above discussion and evidence placed on record by opposite parties, it is observed that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. In the light of document Ex OP-2/2, produced by OP-2, there remains no doubt that on 14.04.2018, withdrawal of Rs.8000/- was made by complainant from her account no. 55144643144 with the help of her ATM Card bearing no. 459203xxxx4075 at the ATM of OP-2 at 10:03:24 a.m. and said  transaction no.6664 was entirely successful as cash was taken by complainant. Complainant has failed to

cc no.-92 of 2018

prove her case. Hence, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merits. However, in peculiar circumstances of the case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum

Dated: 24.09.2019

 

(Param Pal Kaur)                    (Ajit Aggarwal)

Member                         President