M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL                          

                                   

                                      FIRST APPEAL NO. 1231 OF 2013

(Arising out of order dated 24.06.2013 passed in C. C. No.159/2012 by District Commission, Hoshangabad)

 

PRABHUDAYAL KUSHWAHA,

S/O SHRI NARMADA PRASAD KUSHWAHA,

R/O QUARTER NO.3227 TYPE-B,

ORDINANCE FACTORY, TEHSIL-ITARSI,

DISTRICT-HOSHANGABAD (M.P.)                                                                      ….       APPELLANT.

 

                   Versus

 

AXIS BANK LIMITED,

THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER,

BRANCH OFFICE-GROUND FLOOR,

MEGHDOOT HOTEL, OPPOSITE REST HOUSE,

ITARSI, TEHSIL-ITARSI, DISTRICT-HOSHANGABAD (M.P.)                               ….    RESPONDENT.   

                     

BEFORE:

                  HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                      :   PRESIDING MEMBER

                  HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY               :  MEMBER

                  HON’BLE SHRI D. K. SHRIVASTAVA         :   MEMBER

                                  

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

                        Shri Parag Kale, learned counsel for the appellant.

                Shri Yash Vidyarthi, learned counsel for the respondent.   

   

      

                                                        O R D E R

                                       (Passed on 10.10.2022)

                   The following order of the Commission was delivered by A. K. Tiwari, Presiding Member:

                        This appeal is directed against the order dated 24.06.2013 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hoshangabad (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.159/2012 whereby the complaint filed by the complainant/appellant has been dismissed.

2.                The case of the complainant/appellant in brief is such that he had an account number 90010006894506 with the opposite party/

-2-

respondent-bank with ATM facility. It is alleged that since last one year there is a difference in balance amount of Rs.3722.01 between his account and ATM account. It is alleged that he repeatedly asked the opposite party-bank to correct the mistake but no heed was paid. He made a written complaint to the bank on 21.06.2012 thereafter he made a complaint on 22.07.2012 to Banking Lokpal. When Banking Lokpal also took no action, he filed a written complaint to Collector, Hoshangabad. The complainant therefore filed a complaint against the opposite party bank seeking direction to bank to credit an amount of Rs.3722.01 in his ATM balance, Rs.3,000/- expenses occurred in travelling, Rs.40,000/- towards physical distress, Rs.20,000/- towards tarnishing of social reputation totaling Rs.66,722.01 along with interest @ 18% p.a.

3.               The opposite party-bank resisted the complaint stating that there was no difference of amount in his account. On complaint being made, a new passbook was issued to him. In fact there is no difference between the account statement and the slip issued by the ATM. The complainant deliberately produced the copy of misprint passbook before the District Commission. The complainant did not produce the copy of account statement and copy of new passbook issued to him, it is a complainant’s malice. The opposite party-bank is a public financial institution that performs its functions smoothly.

-3-

4.                The District Commission dismissed the complaint holding that the amount shown in slip received from ATM is similar to R-1 produced by the opposite party-bank. Hence this appeal.

5.                Heard. Perused the record.

6.                Learned counsel for the complainant/appellant argued that the District Commission failed to appreciate the facts and evidence available on record. Appellant kept the amount safe with the opposite party-bank and the bank had admitted this fact that they had given misprint passbook. If there was a wrong entry of Rs.3722.01 then how, when

Click Here to Read the rest of this document