DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NAYAGARH .
C.C. Case No. 44 of 2008
13′ th March , 2009 .
BEFORE :
Sri P. K. Pattanaik , President ,
Sri P. K. Mishra, Member
AND
Smt. Binodini Devi , Member .
Name of the Parties .
Sri Pramoda Kumar Swain , aged about 43 years ,
S/o – Sri Udayanath Swain ,
Vill :- Wallipur , P.O – Belapadapatana ,
P.S – Gania, Dist : – Nayagarh .
————— Complainant .
- Vrs -
1.
The Branch Manager, S.B.I., Main Branch, Nayagarh
AT/PO/P.S / Dist. :- Nayagarh .
2.
Mr. R.N.Seth , ATM In-charge, SBI, Nayagarh
AT/PO/P.S / Dist. :- Nayagarh .
3.
The General Manager, SBI., Sachivalaya Marg
Local Head Office, Bhubaneswar. Dist.:- Khurda.
—————- Opp . Parties .
Counsel for the complainant : – Sri Arjuna Sahoo, ( Advocate )
Counsel for the O.Ps : – R.C.Champatiray ( Advocate )
Date of appearance of O.Ps : – 20-10-2008
Date of hearing : – 11-02-2009
Date of Judgment : – 13-03-2009
J U D G M E N T
P. K. Pattanaik , President :-
Deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps is the grievance of the complainant .
The complainant’s case in brief is as follows : -
The complainant is a consumer under O.P.No.1 and O.P. No.2 and O.P.No.3 in the higher authority of O.P.No.1 and O.P.No.2 for all the A.T.M. Transactions. The O.P.No.1 has issued one Savings Bank Pass Book Account No.01190020113 with new A/c No.11383172336 and has also issued the A.T.M. Debit card A/c No.80014300047462 to the complainant who carried on transaction through the said A/c numbers. The complainant is a school teacher and has been drawing his salary form his employer, the D.I. of Schools, Nayagah through the S.B.I. Nayagarh (O.P.No.1). The complainant came to know on 26.5.07 that there is a shortage of Rs.4,000/- in his account when he went to the A.T.M.counter at about 3 P.M of 26.5.07. Thereafter the complainant approached the O.P.No.1 in the matter of shortage of Rs.4000/- in his account and the O.P.No.1 assured him to look into the matter. But he did not take any action for which the complainant filed a written complaint before O.P.No.1 on 22.9.07. Thereafter the O.P.No.2 issued a computerized S.B.I. Times A.T.M web page report to him on 26.9.07. The said report revealed that Rs. 4000 /- has been with drawn on 26.5.07 by the A..T.M. A/c No.622018001430040000. Due to the negligent act of the O.Ps, the said amount was withdrawn by the said A.T.M A/c number for which the complainant has undergone harassment and mental agony and as such the O.Ps are guilty of deficiency in service.
As per the complainant the cause of action arose on 26.5.07 when an amount of Rs.4000/- was missing from his account, on 22.9.07 when the complainant filed a written complaint before O.P.N o.1 and on 26.9..07 when the O.P. No.2 has issued the S.B.I. Times A.T.M. web page to him.
The complainant has approached this Forum with a prayer to direct the O.Ps to pay him the missing amount of Rs.4000/- to pay Rs.30,000/- towards harassments and mental agony and to pay Rs.3000/- towards litigation expenses.
The complaint petition is supported b y affidavit and the complainant has filed xerox copies of some documents which are marked as Annexue -1 to Annexure-4.
The O.Po No.1 has filed written version in which it has been averred that the case is not maintainable. The O.P.No.1 has admitted the statements made by the complainant in para-1 to para-3 of the complaint petition . As per the version of O.P.No.1, the complainant has withdrawn Rs.4000/- from the A.T.M. counter at old bus stand, Nayagarh ATM-ID No.SIAN00014301 transaction No.3700 on dt.26.5.07 by operating his ATM card No.6220180014300047462 which has been issued to him against the A/c No.01190020113 and it has been reflected in the J.P. Log on the very day. But due to some technical failure the ATM disbursed the cash without debiting the complainant’s account creating thereby a physical shortfall of the same amount and the same cash has been disbursed by the ATM by debiting the Bank’s account i.e. A/c ATM-OD Account (in Bank master). To adjust that shortfall, the Bank has debited Rs.1000/-on 19.7.07 which was available on that date in the account of the complainant. On 23.7.07 the Bank switched over to C.B.S platform and opened an O.D. account favouring the complainant with an debit balance of Rs.3000/- . On availability of balance the amount has been deducted from the complainant’s
account to close the O.D. account standing in his name. In this way the O.P.No.1 has discharged his duty properly by operating the complainant’s account and by the system of ATM to set right any mistake caused due to the technical failure of the system. The entire transaction bas been reflected in the J.P. Log of the A.T.M which is maintained by the Bank and the J.P.Log shows that the complainant has withdrawn Rs.4000/- on 26.5.07 and as such the allegation by the complainant against the Bank in respect of the said amount as missing is baseless. As per the remain of O.P.No.1 there is no deficiency on his part in providing service to the complainant and as such the case needs to be dismissed.
The written version of O.P.No.1 is supported by affidavit and the O.P.No.1 has filed Xerox copies of some documents which are marked as Annexue- A to Annexue- B.
O.P.No.2 has filed written version in which it has been averred that the O.P.No.2 is an employee in the S.B.I., Nayagarh Branch and is working as an officer in-charge of ATM. He has acted in his official capacity and is not personally responsible for the alleged transaction of the complainant. O.P.No.2 has averred that the written version filed by the O.P.No.1 may be treated as the version of O.P.No.2. As per his version there is no deficiency on his part in providing service to the complainant and as such the case against him needs to be dismissed.
The version of O.P.N o.2 is supported by affidavit.
O.P. No.3 has been set ex-parte.
On the pleadings of the parties, we take up the issue of deficiency in service for adjudication.
F I N D I N G S
Section (2) (1) (g) of the C.P ACT defines “deficiency” as under :-
“Deficiency means any fault,imperfection,shortcoming or inadequacy
in the quality,nature and manner of performance which is required to be
maintained by or under any law for the time being in force or has been
undertaken to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or
otherwise in relation to any service ”.
The allegation of the complainant is that he has not withdrawn Rs.4000/- from the ATM counter near bus stand whose number is SIAN 00014301 on 26. 5. 2007 from his S. B. Account No . 01190020113 and new A/c No.11383172336 by operating his ATM card No.6220180014300047462.
The complainant has filed xerox copies of some document
which are marked as Annexure-1 to Annexure-4.
Annexure-1 is the xerox copy of the ATM-cum-Debit Card .
Annexure-2 to 2/3 is the xerox copy of the S.B Pass Book No.01190020113 with new A/C No. 11383172336 .
Annexure-3 is the xerox copy of the letter dt. 22.9.07 by the complainant to O.P. No.1 in the matter of missing of Rs.4000/- from his Account.
Annexure- 4 is the xerox copy of the S. B. I. Times ATM web page dt.26.5.07.
The O.P.No.1 has filed copies of some documents which are marked as Annexure-A and Annexure-B .
Annexure-A is the Certified copy of the J.P. Log dt. 26.5.07 which shows the transaction on 26.5.07.
Annexure-B is the Certified copy the statement of the S.B. Account of the complainant.
The O.P.No.1 has filed written argument.
Ld. Advocate for the O.P. N0. 1 and O.P.No.2 has relied on the Certified copy of the Journal printer Log(J.P.Log) vide Annexure-A to prove that the complainant has withdrawn an amount of Rs.4000/- on 26.5.07 from the Bus Stand ATM counter by using his ATM Card.
As per the submission of the Ld. Advocate for O.P. No. 1 and O.P. No.2 , the complainant had withdrawn Rs.4,000 /- from the Bus Stand ATM SIAN00014301 vide transaction No.3700 by using his debit card. Due to some technical failure the ATM disbursed the cash without debiting the complainant’s account creating a physical shortfall of the same amount and the same cash has been disbursed by the ATM by debiting the Bank’s account i.e. A/C ATM OD Account (in Bank Master). To adjust that short fall, the Bank has debited Rs.1000/- on 19.7.07 which was available on that date. Thereafter the Bank on 23.7.07 snitched over to C.B.S. platform and opened an O.D. account of Rs.3000/- in favour of the complainant. On availability of balance the amount has been deducted from the complainant’s account to close the O.D. account. Interest was not taken on the O.D. Account. In this way the Bank has set right the mistake caused out of the failure of the technical system of A.T.M.
Annexure-A is the certified copy of the Journal printer Log which shows as under.
Time of transaction – 14.53
ATM card number lused -6220180014300047462
ATM I.D.- SIAN 00014301
Transaction No.-3700
Response code-000 (which implies that the transaction is a
successful one )
Withdrawal amount- Rs.4000/-
A/c number- 01190020113
Available balance- Rs.1721.51.
Ld. Advocate for the complainant has filed S.B.I Times ATM page dt. 26.5.07 which is marked as Annexure-4. Relying on Annexure-4 Ld. Advocate for the complainant has submitted that an amount of Rs.4000/- has been withdrawn on 26.5.2007 from ATM by using the ATM No.6220180014300040000 but the complainant’s ATM number is 6220180014300047462 and as such the complainant has not withdrawn the said amount of Rs. 4000/- on 26.5.2007.
Ld. Advocate for O.P.No.1 and O.P.No.2 has submitted that the ATM No.6220180014300040000 is the same as ATM No.6220180014300047462 because due to technical failure of the net, the last four digits of the every ATM number of the day’s transaction was shown as “0000”
After a careful perusal of Annexure – 4 filed by the complainant we find that the last four digits of all the ATM card numbers have been shown as “0000” and the number against which Rs.4000/- has been withdrawn on 26.5.07 has been star marked. The Annexure-4 has been given by O.P.No.2 to the complainant . The star marked ATM card number 6220180014300040000 corresponds to ATM card No.6220180014300047462 as is shown in the said Annexure- 4.
In the light of the above said analysis, we are of the opinion that the complainant has withdrawn Rs.4000/- from the ATM counter on 25.6.07 by using his ATM card No.622018001430004762 and as such we find no deficiency on the part of the O.Ps in rendering service to the complainant.
There is no specific allegation against O.P.No.3 and as such the case against O.P.No.3 is dismissed ex-parte.
Hence it is ordered .
O R D E R
The complainant’s case is dismissed on contest against O.P.No.1 and O.P.No.2 and is dismissed ex-parte against O.P.No.3 . No order as to cost.
Sri P. K. Pattanaik
President .
Smt. Binodini Devi :-
Member
Sri Pravakar Mishra :-
Member