State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Punjab National Bank vs Rajinder Singh Nath on 23 October, 2018
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 124 / 2014
1. Punjab National Bank
Branch Vikas Bhawan, Roshanabad
Tehsil & District Haridwar
2. Punjab National Bank
Branch Ahmedpur, Tehsil & District Haridwar
3. Punjab National Bank
Circle Office, Sector-IV, BHEL
Ranipur, Tehsil & District Haridwar
......Appellants / Opposite Parties
Versus
Sh. Rajinder Singh Nath S/o Sh. Dev Singh Nath
R/o Room No. 27/1, Police Line, Roshanabad, Haridwar
.......Respondent / Complainant
Sh. S.M. Joshi, Learned Counsel for the Appellants
Sh. Shardul Negi, Learned Counsel for Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.S. Verma, President
Mr. Balveer Prasad, H.J.S., Member
Mrs. Veena Sharma, Member
Dated: 23/10/2018
ORDER
(Per: Mr. Balveer Prasad, Member):
Invoking the provisions contained in Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the appeal has been preferred against the order dated 13.06.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Haridwar (hereinafter to be referred as 'The District Forum') in case No. 31 of 2014; Rajinder Singh Nath vs. Punjab National Bank, whereby the consumer complaint was allowed, directing the Bank to pay Rs. 15,000/-, the amount deducted from the consumer's account and compensation in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- only.2
2. The dynamics of the case is that the complainant is the consumer of the Punjab National Bank having saving's account No. 1333000400061957 at Branch Office, Vikas Bhawan, Roshanabad, District Hardwar. On the request of the complainant, ATM card was issued by the Bank. On 17.12.2013, the ATM card was used by the consumer at Ranipur Mod, Haridwar, for withdrawing an amount of Rs. 15,000/-, but due to some defect in the machine, no cash could be dispensed and the machine returned the card out, as such the ATM card got hanged. Thereafter, SBI - ATM situated nearby, was contacted for withdrawal of Rs. 15,000/- resulting in successful transaction, the withdrawal slip as came out-showed two debit entries of Rs. 15,000/- each. So, for the unwarranted withdrawal of Rs. 15,000/-, complaints were sent on Toll Free Number on 18 and 19 December, 2013. It was also pleaded that CCTV footage was seen in the presence of Bank officials, which showed no dispensing of cash by the ATM.
3. Denying the factum narrated in the complaint, the Punjab National Bank submitted that as per ATM transaction report dated 17.12.2013, the complainant used the ATM card at Ahmedpur Branch of Punjab National Bank and withdrew Rs. 15,000/-, the entries for the same effect find place in J.P. Log etc. The transaction took place at 07:30p.m. on that day. No cause of action ever arose against the Bank, nor any unfair trade practice was made.
4. The District Forum, on appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint, in the terms mentioned in the order impugned. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has come up, projecting the appeal mainly on the grounds that the order in question is not in consonance with the available record, nor the evidence was correctly appreciated and as such, the Judgment passed by the District Forum is not sustainable in law.
35. Rival submissions were made by learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the appellant emphasized that the conduct of the complainant is not based on bona fide. It was also argued that the evidence furnished by the Punjab National Bank was not taken into consideration by the District Forum, nor the documents furnished were considered at all. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent urged that the District Forum passed a valid verdict and the consumer is entitled for the ratification of the relief granted by the District Forum.
6. We have examined the entire material on record and gave thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced before us.
7. In order to appreciate the points involved, it is necessary to have a look at the factual scenario of the case. As admitted to the parties, complainant is the consumer of the Punjab National Bank and is availing ATM card facility against his saving's account. The dispute pertains to the use of ATM card on 17.12.2013. The grievance of the complainant is that when he used the ATM card for the withdrawal of amount Rs. 15,000/-, some defect in the ATM machine occurred, as a result thereof ATM card was hanged and no cash could come out. Soon thereafter, the complainant contacted the nearby SBI ATM for the withdrawal of the amount and successfully withdrew Rs. 15,000/- from SBI's ATM. The withdrawal slip showed two entries, as to the debit of Rs. 15,000/- each.
8. The complainant submitted affidavit in support of his claim, whereas Sh. Kuldip Singh Chauhan, Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, deposed by way of affidavit that the ultimate truth is that, as per ATM transaction report, the complainant successfully withdrew Rs. 15,000/- through ATM machine at Ahmedpur Branch of Punjab National Bank, the entry to the same effect finds place in J.P. Log etc. and this transaction took place at 07:30p.m. on that date. The photocopies of Reconciliation Sheet, Switch Report, Transactions Detail and ATM ID with regard to the 4 transaction in question are annexed herewith. It was also specified that no Bank officials committed unfair trade practice in the matter.
9. Perusal of the reconciliation sheet would reveal that transaction as to the withdrawal of Rs. 15,000/- was a successful transaction, which took place at Ahmedpur Branch of the Punjab National Bank. The switch report also substantiates, all what worded in the affidavit furnished by the Branch Manager of the Bank. ATM - ID and the transaction details goes on to confirm the response code, as '000'. Thus, the affirmation confirms the genuineness of the withdrawal made by the complainant through Ahmedpur Branch of Punjab National Bank.
10. It is also worth to observe that the complainant preferred no specific denial of the counter-affidavit furnished by the Bank Manager, nor the documents appended to it, were challenged. This state of affairs throws the sad reflection, as to the reliability of the facts narrated in the complaint. In view of the elaborate procedure evolved by the Bank to ensure that without the ATM card and knowledge of the PIN Number, it is not possible for money to be withdrawn by any person from the ATM.
11. The complainant also produced an affidavit sworn by one-Sh. Sunil Singh Negi, who deposed that when the complainant was using the ATM card on 17.12.2013 at Ranipur Mod, Punjab National Bank, he was standing outside the ATM machine and the complainant while coming out, disclosed to him that on account of some fault in the ATM machine, the ATM card got hanged and the money could not come out and for that reason, he is moving for the other ATM machine. The evidence furnished by Sh. Sunil Singh Negi is based on 'Hearsay'. The District Forum attached no importance to the documentary evidence furnished on behalf of the Punjab National Bank. There is a presumption on the genuineness of the electronic evidence; it is regarded as genuine unless rebutted by some reliable evidence. The arguments raised on behalf of the Bank, are 5 convincing. We are unable to locate any merit in the arguments placed on behalf of the respondent.
12. On overall analysis of the matter, we find that the District Forum failed to appreciate the evidence furnished by the parties in the right perspective. The order in question is devoid of merits. Thus, the appeal deserves to be accepted.
13. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 13.06.2014 is hereby set aside and in consequence thereof, the consumer complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs. The statutory amount deposited by the Bank, be released in favour of the appellant.
(MRS. VEENA SHARMA) (BALVEER PRASAD) (JUSTICE B.S. VERMA)