M. THANIKACHALAM J. - (1.) The complainant having succeeded partially, not satisfied, has come to this Commission by way of appeal, for the enhancement of the compensation or claiming the amount as preferred in the complaint. Brief facts in the complaint relating to the case:
(2.) The complainant is having a Savings Bank Account with the first opposite party and his pension amount is credited to the said account, namely Savings Bank No.1021195309-6. He is also owing an ATM Card supplied by the first opposite party and its number is 6220180377100145731. Believing the information supplied by the opposite parties, without carrying much cash, the complainant traveled to Udhagamandalam and on the way reached Coonoor on 01.09.2006 at about 12 noon. In order to draw cash, using the ATM Card, he used the ATM Machine, located at Coonoor, there instead of rolling the cash required, the ATM rolled out a customer advice note, numbered TXN No.4249, with the remark Sorry unable to process. The attempt of the complainant once again also resulted the same result, with skipped number of TXN. The complainant then approached the State Bank of India, Coonoor for Redressal, there was no proper response. Immediately, he attempted to contact the Head Office through toll-free helpline, for which, there is no response. Thereafter, he requested a fresh card, returning the compromised ATM Card by speed post, to the first opposite party with letter, requesting to issue a new card. Despite repeated reminders and information through telephone, there was no immediate response regarding the supply of new ATM Card, thereby, the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service not only when ATM Card was inserted for cash which failed to supply the cash, but also in supplying the new card forthwith. The conduct of the opposite parties would amount to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice. Because of the deficiency in service, the complainant was unable to repair his house, because of the delay caused, unable to take possession from the tenant and because of non-supply of new card, unable to draw the amount from his savings bank account, thereby, compelled to use HDFC Card, where he had no sufficient funds. By the above said deficiency or defects, the complainant suffered irreparable loss, mental agony etc., for which, he should be compensated, by directing the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.12,50,000/-.
(3.) The opposite parties filing Written Version, denying the adverse allegations available in the complaint, interlia have stated further that there was no deficiency of any kind in the service rendered by the opposite parties, that skipping of a single number in the machine is beyond the control of the opposite parties, which will not amount to deficiency of service, that even as per the allegations in Para 18 that the lapses were on the part of the complainant and in order to cover his act of negligence and casualness, a false complaint claiming unimaginable amounts, as compensation has been filed that the complainant could have availed the service of State Bank of India ATM itself, instead of advising the first opposite party to hot list his ATM Card and make it inoperative, that having done so, the complainant cannot now take shelter that he had to use the HDFC Card because of the SBI ATM did not roll out money on one instance, that at the request, new card was prepared with the PIN mailer, unable to send it to the complainant because of the absence of any documentary evidence to prove the change of address and that there is no unfair trade practice or deficiency in service, thereby, praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;