State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Debit Card Cell Punjab National Bank vs Kishan Singh Negi on 21 December, 2017
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, UTTARAKHAND, DEHRADUN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 140 / 2010
1. The Assistant General Manager
Debit Card Cell, Punjab National Bank
I.T. Division 5, Sansad Marg, New Delhi
2. The Manager
Punjab National Bank
Main Branch, EL-Fiston Hotel, Tallital Nainital
All through Sh. D.R. Arya, Manager
Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Bareily Road, Nainital
......Appellants / Opposite Parties
Versus
Sh. Kishan Singh Negi S/o Sh. Nar Singh Negi
R/o T.K. House, Mahesh Nagar, Nawabi Road
Nainital, District Nainital
......Respondent / Complainant
Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, Learned Counsel for the Appellants
Sh. Yogendra Singh Chufal, Learned Counsel for Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.S. Verma, President
Mrs. Veena Sharma, Member
Dated: 21/12/2017
ORDER
(Per: Mrs. Veena Sharma, Member):
This appeal, under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, has been preferred by the appellants-opposite parties against the judgment and order dated 19.04.2010 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 41 of 2007. By the order impugned the District Forum has partly allowed the consumer complaint and directed them to pay Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant, jointly or separately, together interest @ 6% per annum, pendent lite and in future on the said amount and Rs. 2,000/- towards litigation charges.2
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case, as mentioned in the consumer complaint, are that the complainant-Sh. Kishan Singh Negi is having a saving bank account No. 0120019 in the Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Nainital. He is using ATM card facility also and the said ATM card bearing No. 5048842717010000599. On 07.12.2006 (wrongly written 07.12.2008) the complainant tried to withdraw Rs. 10,000/- from the PNB ATM, Main Branch, Haldwani (opposite party No. 2), but due to non- working of ATM machine, he could not withdraw money. On 11.12.2006 (wrongly written 11.12.2008), the complainant tried to withdraw money from the ATM, Main Branch, Haldwani, but again the transaction was failed. Neither the complainant get the money, nor any transaction slip was printed by the machine. The complainant personally contacted the Manager, Punjab National Bank, Haldwani (opposite party no. 2). The Branch Manager assured him that due to technical fault, transaction of ATM could be failed. So the complainant was advised to give written application. On the same day, i.e. on 11.12.2006, the complainant gave an application to the opposite party No. 2, who immediately informed the Head Office, Delhi and the complainant was assured that the money will be credited in his account. The complainant went to Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Nainital and updated his passbook, then he came to know that the transaction of Rs. 10,000/- occurred on 07.12.2006 and another transaction occurred on 11.12.2006 were shown successfully. The complainant complaint about these transactions to the Manager, Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, EL-Fiston Hotel, Tallital, Nainital-opposite party No. 3. They also assured him that the money will be credited to his account. But after several correspondence from the opposite parties, the complainant did not get the said amount in his account, therefore, he filed a consumer complaint before the District Forum, Nainital.
3. The opposite parties-Punjab National Bank filed written statement before the District Forum and admitted that a saving bank account No. 27120001000120019 is in the name of complainant-Sh. Kishan Singh 3 Negi in their bank. The complainant had withdrawn Rs. 10,000/- through ATM on 07.12.2006 and on 11.12.2006 he again withdrawn Rs. 10,000/- by using his ATM card. Para No. 4 of the consumer complaint was not admitted that on 07.12.2006 and 11.12.2006 ATM machine was not functioning. After receiving the complaint from the complainant, the Bank has investigated the matter and it was found that on the above dates the transactions were successful and no excess amount was in the ATM tray. The complainant was orally informed about the said transactions. As the amount was withdrawn successfully, so no question arise to deposit the money in the complainant's account. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the answering opposite parties. The consumer complaint was filed to harass the answering opposite parties, which is liable to be dismissed.
4. The District Forum, on an appreciation of the material on record, allowed the consumer complaint vide impugned order dated 19.04.2010 in the above manner. Aggrieved by the said order, the opposite parties- appellants have filed the present appeal.
5. We have heard Sh. Vijay Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants and Sh. Yogendra Singh Chufal, learned counsel for respondent. We have also gone through the entire record of the District Forum and have also perused the material placed on record.
6. In the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants-opposite parties has submitted that the order impugned dated 19.04.2010 passed by the District Forum is based on surmises and conjectures and is liable to be set aside The District Forum has not taken the note that now a days in all the banks the work is carried out through internet / computers and the consumer himself till date has not become expert in using the same. The District Forum has failed to consider the fact that in case of any error in operating ATM, the complainant was immediately required to report the same mater to the call center. The complainant has not produced any evidence beyond 4 doubt that the cash was not withdrawn on 07.12.2006 and 11.12.2006. The order impugned passed by the District Forum is liable to be set aside.
7. There is no dispute with regard to fact that the complainant- respondent is having a saving bank account at Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Haldwani and holding a facility of ATM card. The dispute is only with regard to the transaction of Rs. 10,000/- on 07.12.2006 and another transaction of Rs. 10,000/- on 11.12.2006. The main grievance of the respondent is that when he tried to withdraw the amount from the ATM machine on various dates, he could not receive the said amounts. Neither the respondent-complainant got any message in the screen of the ATM machine, nor he received any slip from the said ATM regarding transactions. Respondent stated that he has lost Rs. 20,000/- on account of non-functioning of ATM machine. On the screen, no message was flashed, if the money had not been disbursed, the ATM should have issued some slip also, but no receipt was issued.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble National Commission in the case of State Bank of India vs. K.K. Bhalla; 2011 (1) CPJ 106 (NC). In the said judgment, the Hon'ble National Commission has held that merely because the CCTV was not working on those dates and its footage was thus not available, does not mean that the money could be withdrawn fraudulently without using the ATM card and the PIN number. In case the ATM card has been stolen or the PIN number had become known to persons other than ATM card holder then the CCTV coverage could have helped in identifying the persons who had fraudulently used the card. In the instant case, there is no question of CCTV footage regarding transaction of cash. Therefore, with due respect to the judgment of Hon'ble National Commission, this case law is not applicable in the present case.
9. After perusal of all the papers filed by both the parties, we did not find any investigation report, as in the written statement the opposite 5 parties-Bank has stated that they investigated the matter and found the disputed transactions were successful. In support of their contention "cash was tallied with ATM counter, there was no difference and found no excess cash in the ATM at Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Haldwani- opposite party No. 2." But the opposite parties failed to file any such report of investigation and no computer statement of any investigation agency has been filed in evidence.
10. We are of the view that the appellants-opposite parties could not prove that the respondent has received the disputed amount from the ATM. The appellants' failed to file report of investigation team. Therefore, in our view the impugned judgment and order passed by the District Forum does not suffer from any infirmity and the same is fit to be upheld. Thus, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
11. For the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. Impugned judgment and order dated 19.04.2010 passed by the District Forum, Nainital in consumer complaint No. 41 of 2007 is hereby affirmed. No order as to costs.
(MRS. VEENA SHARMA) (JUSTICE B.S. VERMA)