SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CONSUMER) 62

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION- VIII (CENTRAL)
Jitender Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Punjab and Sindh Bank – Respondent
Consumer Complaint No.: DC/77/CC/153/2023



##PAGE1##

District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission- VIII (Central)

(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

5th Floor, Maharana Pratap Inter State Bus Terminal Building ISBT Kashmere Gate, Delhi- 110006 Consumer Complaint No.: DC/77/CC/153/2023 In the matter of Jitender Singh S/O Sh. Shiv Kumar R/O H.No.7, Village & Post Sharfuddinpur Jawli, Tehsil & District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh-201102 … Complainant Vs.

The Punjab and Sindh Bank, Through its Branch Manager, Village & Post Jawli Branch, District Ghaziabad, U.P.-201102 … Opposite Party No. 1 Punjab & Sindh Bank, Through its Principal Nodal Officer, 21, Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008 … Opposite Party No. 2 The Axis Bank Jhandewalan Extension Branch, Through its Branch Manager, E-1, Rani Jhansi Road, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi-110055 … Opposite Party No. 3 The Axis Bank Head Office, Through its Branch Manager, 2nd Floor, Red Fort, Capital Parsvnath Tower, Bhai Veer Singh Marg, New Gole Market Block-1,WEA, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110001 … Opposite Party No. 4

##PAGE2##

ORDER

27.08.2026 (Dr. Rashmi Bansal, Member)

By the present order, this Commission is disposing of the complaint filed by the complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties in relation to a failed ATM transaction, whereby, according to the complainant, an amount of ₹10,000/- was debited from his bank account although the cash was not dispensed by the ATM, resulting in financial loss, inconvenience, harassment and mental agony to him.

Case of the Complainant

1. It is the case of the complainant that he is an account holder of Opposite Party No.1 and is maintaining Savings Bank Account No. 10821000103643 with the said bank. The complainant was also issued ATM/Debit Card No. 508552108208 by Opposite Party No.1. It is submitted that on 05.12.2022 at about 2:16 p.m., the complainant attempted to withdraw a sum of ₹10,000/- from an ATM of Axis Bank, i.e. Opposite Party No.3. Although the transaction appeared to have been successfully processed and the complainant received the corresponding transaction message, the ATM did not dispense any cash. Despite non-dispensation of cash, an amount of ₹10,000/- was debited from the complainant’s bank account. The complainant has further stated that immediately after his transaction, his colleague also used the same ATM and successfully withdrew ₹20,000/-. According to the complainant, this circumstance further demonstrated that the ATM was operational and that the disputed transaction was a case of non-dispensation of cash despite debit of the amount from his account.

##PAGE3##

2. It is submitted that the complainant immediately approached Opposite Party No.1. On 07.12.2022, he informed the Branch Manager of Opposite Party No.1 regarding the wrongful debit of ₹10,000/- without corresponding cash disbursement. The Branch Manager assured the complainant that the matter would be resolved and requested him to wait for some time. However, despite the assurance, the amount was not re-credited to his account. Thereafter, on 19.12.2022, the complainant submitted a written complaint to Opposite Party No.1 regarding the failed transaction and requested that the wrongly deducted amount be restored to his account. The complainant submits that he was informed by the Branch Manager that, according to the bank’s records, the transaction had been shown as successful and, therefore, no amount was payable to him.

3. Being dissatisfied with the response, the complainant again approached Opposite Party No.1 on 05.01.2023, requesting a proper investigation into the matter. The complainant has stated that he was also asked to deposit/pay ₹590/- towards further investigation charges and, accordingly, requested that the said amount be deducted from his account. He was thereafter assured that his grievance would be resolved within approximately 45 days. According to the complainant, despite the expiry of the said period, the matter remained unresolved. The complainant thereafter sub

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top