ORDER

APPEARED AT THE TIME OF ARGUMENTS

PER DR. B.C. GUPTA, PRESIDING MEMBER

          This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 27.07.2011, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the State Commission’) in FA No. 1499/2009, “ICICI Bank Ltd. & Anr. vs. Karam Singh & Anr.”, vide which, while dismissing the said appeal on grounds of limitation as well as on merits, the order dated 29.06.2009 passed by the District Forum Panipat, allowing the consumer complaint No. 267/2007, was upheld. 

2.       Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondents/complainants opened a joint savings account bearing No. 017401518068 with the opposite party (OP), the ICICI Bank and were provided the facility of ATM card.  It is stated in the consumer complaint that the complainants had their mobile phone registered with the Bank for operation of their account.  They used to receive messages on their phone, as and when any transaction took place from their account.  It is stated that the last transaction made by the complainants was on 20.11.2006 and at that time, the balance amount left in their account was ₹2,07,627/-.  There was no transaction made by them between the period 21.11.2006 to 25.02.2007.  On the next day, i.e., 26.02.2007, when the complainants wanted to withdraw a sum of ₹15,000/- from their account, the ATM machine showed the balance amount as ₹203/- only.  It is alleged that the amount was fraudulently drawn from their account by somebody during the period 21.11.2006 to 25.02.2007, although they did not receive any message on their cell-phone during the said period.  Even the information/message regarding the maintenance of minimum amount of ₹5,000/- in the Bank account was not received on their phone.  The complainants moved applications to the authorities of the ICICI Bank, seeking retrieval of the amount withdrawn from their account, but to no effect.  An FIR bearing No. 107 dated 06.03.2007 u/s 420/468/471 IPC was also lodged with the local police.  The complainants filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking directions to the OP Bank to pay a sum of ₹2,07,368/- to their joint saving account alongwith interest @12% p.a. from the date of withdrawal till realisation.  A compensation of ₹2,50,000/- on account of mental harassment etc. was also demanded.

3.       The complaint was resisted by the petitioners/OPs bank by filing a reply before the District Forum, in which they took the main plea that the debit card as well as the PIN was in possession of the complainants themselves, and no amount could have been withdrawn without the use of the debit card and the PIN.  In case some fraudulent withdrawal of any amount had taken place, the complainants were responsible for the same.  There was no deficiency in service on the part of the Bank, vis-à-vis, the complainants.  The consumer complaint, therefore, deserved to be dismissed. 

4.       The District Forum vide their order dated 29.06.2009 partly allowed the consumer complaint and directed the OP Bank to credit a sum of ₹2,07,368/- to the complainants with interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till realisation, as well as litigation cost of ₹2200/-.  Being aggrieved against the order of the District Forum, the petitioners/OPs challenged the same by way of appeal before the State Commission.  The said appeal having been dismissed by the State Commission vide impugned order dated 27.07.2011, the OP Bank is before this Commission by way of the present revision petition.

5.       During arguments before us, it was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner Bank that the OP Bank was not at fault in any manner because the ATM card in question, was in possession of the complainants both before and after the said transactions.  The withdrawal of money must have taken place due to some wrongful act done by the co