District Consumer Forum, Bokaro.
Complaint Case No. 17 of 2009
Sardar Swarn Singh S/o late Hari Singh
R/0 10/10 Sunday Bazar, P.O.-Sunday Bazar,
Dist.- Bokaro.
Versus
The Branch Manager, State Bank of India
Bokaro Colliery, Sunday Bazar, Bokaro.
Before-
S.M.Alam, President
Vijay Bahadur Singh, Member
Shabnam Praveen, Member
Date of Judgment-: 08 July, 2009
Date of case filing-: 05 March, 2009
-: Judgment:-
The Complainant has filed this case against the opposite Party to credit/refund of Rs. 13000/- deducted from the saving Bank Account No. 11471757520 of the complainant with 12% interest since January, 2009 till the date of payment besides Rs. 5000/- compensation for mental and physical agony.
2 Brief fact of the case is that the complainant is a permanent employee of Khash Mahal Project and has a saving Bank Account No. 11471757520 in the SBI (Opposite party). The monthly salary of the complainant also being sent to the opposite party by his employers. On 19.01.2009 the complainant sent to the opposite party for up dating of his Pass Book and noticed that Rs. 8000/- and RS.5000/- respectively were debited. From his account in the Colum of his Passbook/ATM OD 10.03.2008 was mentioned and Rs. 13000- was shown in the column of amount withdrawn. The complainant immediately met to the staff concern and the branch Manager who told him that the said amount were withdrawn by the complainant on 10.03.2008 which was not recorded in the ATM machine and therefore that amount was deducted on 19.01.2009 by the opposite party. On 10.03.208 the complainant had Rs. 53281.02 in his said account and out of said amount, the opposite party debited Rs. 7000/- towards personal loan and complainant withdrawn Rs. 45000/- on same date. After withdrawal of same amount there was Rs. 1281.02 left only and therefore, the allegation of withdrawn of Rs. 13000/- by the complainant is false and baseless and wrong. The complainant sent a legal notice on 31.01.2009 to the opposite party who, through their lawyer replied that the allegation of complainant was not correct and annexed the Xerox copy of transaction dated 10.03.2008, by the complainant. From perusal of said Xerox copy it appeared that there was no similarity in the statement of account, entry in the passbook and the statement sent by the lawyer of the opposite party. The complainant has mentioned the transaction which would be made on 10.03.2008 by the complainant at the foot of this complaint. According to entry in the Passbook and statement in account Rs. 1000/- is the last withdrawal by the complainant but as per documents of the opposite party said amount is the first withdrawal. Due to Mechanical defect of number of entries are wrongly reported by the ATM Machine which results in undue harassment and agony to its customer. The complainant had not withdrawn the said amount and alleged withdrawal has wrongly been recorded by the ATM Machine. Thus under the aforesaid circumstances the opposite party is not only liable to credit of Rs. 13000/- with interest in the account of complainant but also compensation for losses caused to him. The cause of action arose on 19.01.2009 when the opposite party debited Rs. 13000/- from the account of the complainant. There is deficiency on the part of the opposite party and the opposite party is liable to pay the aforesaid amount together with compensation to the complainant.
3 Upon issuance of notice, the opposite party appeared and filed written statement. It is submitted on the basis of the complainant that on 10.03.2008 the complainant withdrawn a sum of Rs. 5000/- and Rs. 8000/- through ATM but due to mechanical error the machine did not debit the account though it has disbursed the amount as per report of ATM Switch Centre. Some time cash is disbursed by the ATM but customer’s account is not debited and it can be noticed through No. 98581 and sometimes cash is not disbursed by the ATM but customer’s account is debited and it can be noticed through No. 98582. On thorough scrutiny of the account of the complainant it was detected that out of these 2 transactions a sum of Rs. 13000/- has been withdrawn by the complainant through ATM which has not been debited, as such the opposite party Bank was lawfully entitled to debited the account and it has rightly debited the same on 19.01.2009. The further submission of the opposite party is that in order to take undue advantage of mechanical error of ATM of not debiting the withdrawn amount of Rs. 13000/-, the complainant might have siphoned off the account by subsequent withdrawals as is alleged in paragraph 5 of the complaint petition and this further transaction can in no way justify dishonest statements of the complainant. The opposite party Bank has not committed any deficiency in rendering service and the complainant has not got valid cause of action because the real fact was dully intimated to the complainant as he himself admitted in paragraph 4 of complaint petition. Under the above fact and circumstances, the complaint petition having no merit and is liable to be dismissed with cost in favour of the opposite party.
4 Heard both the parties. On perusal of the entire case records and documents filed on behalf of the parties, it is observed that complainant had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 8000/- as Rs. 5000/- on 10.03.2008 through ATM operation. Though the above sums were disbursed as per the ATM Switch Centre, the same could not be debited in the complainant’s account due to certain error in the ATM Machine. Finally the amount of Rs. 13000/- (Rs.8000/- + Rs.5000/-) was debited in the account of the complainant on 19.01.2009. In view of the above we find no error committed by the opposite party Bank. We, therefore, do not hold the opposite party negligent and deficient towards the complainant and hence it is not held liable to pay any relief to the complainant.
5 Under the facts and circumstances of the case, no merit is found in the complaint case and the same is dismissed according hereby.
Member (lady) Member President