N.KANNADASAN, J. - (1.) The appellant is the complainant; the opposite parties are the respondents herein. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents.
(2.) The appeal is filed as against the order of dismissal of the complaint by the District Forum in OP.No.181/2003 dt.3.1.2006. The nature of the complaint proceeds in the following manner: The complainant was holding a SBI credit card with the credit limit of Rs.20000/- including cash limit of Rs.8000/-. The complainant has never used the said card to withdraw the money, but however card was used only to purchase materials from merchandise. The complainant had never parted with the card to anybody, including his family member and the pin number was not disclosed. While so, he has received a monthly statement dt.11.1.02 for the period from December 2001 onwards. He was surprised to see that somebody has withdrawn money of Rs.8000/- through ATM card on 20.12.01 and a sum of Rs.100/- on 25.12.01. According to the complainant eventhough the cash limit is only to the extent of Rs.8000/-, it is not known as to how an additional sum of Rs.100/- was allowed to be drawn on 25.12.01. Immediately after noticing the above statement of account, the complainant has telephonically informed the 2nd opposite party on 17.1.2002 to block the card, followed by a letter dt.19.1.2002 (Ex.A1). Subsequently, the complainant has sent two letters dt.1.4.2002 and 6.4.2002 (Ex.A4 and A5), requesting the 2nd opposite party to provide camera clippings to find out the truth and to nab the culprit. The opposite parties have not responded to the request made by the complainant, even to provide the camera clippings and as such there was deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and accordingly the complaint is preferred for the relief as stated therein.
(3.) The opposite parties / respondents herein resisted the complaint by contending that the cameras are installed only for the purpose of preventing and detecting burglaries or breaking of ATM machine and to prevent removal of cash from the machine and the said camera do not provide any clippings as requested by the complainant. It is further contended that the complainant ought to have given a police complaint and thereafter he has to give a representation in writing to the opposite parties by enclosing the copy of FIR. The District Forum has accepted the stand taken by the opposite parties and dismissed the complaint against which the present appeal is filed.;