F.A. No. 893 of 2011. Case: State Bank of India Vs J. Nagaiah. Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Case NumberF.A. No. 893 of 2011
CounselFor Appellant: Sivanandam, Advocate
JudgesR. Regupathi, J. (President), J. Jayaram, Member (J) and P. Bakiyavathi, Member
IssueConsumer Law
CitationIII (2014) CPJ 256
Judgement DateJuly 08, 2014
CourtTamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission


J. Jayaram, Member (J)

  1. This appeal is filed by the opposite parties against the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chengalpattu in C.C. 21/2006, dated 13.5.2011, allowing the complaint. The case of the complainant is that he had an SB Account with the 1st opposite party bank, and he availed of ATM Card facility also; and on expiry of the validity period of the old card, he had been provided with a new card and even after that some amounts have been periodically withdrawn from his account using the old card and as such a sum of Rs. 39,000 has been unauthorisedly withdrawn from his bank account. The opposite party bank allowed usage of the old card also even after issuing a new card and which has resulted in unauthorized withdrawal of Rs. 39,000 from the complainant's account, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

  2. According to the opposite parties, the complainant or his son who admittedly has withdrawn amounts from the bank occasionally, using the old ATM Card and the old ATM card was not immediately cancelled because there might be delay in issuing new card. There is no deficiency in service on their part.

  3. The District Forum considered the rival contentions and allowed the complaint holding that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties in not cancelling the old ATM card while issuing the new ATM card. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the opposite parties have preferred the appeal.

  4. An additional document viz. The Terms and Conditions of ATM Card has been filed and marked as Ex. B1 on the side of the appellants/opposite parties.

  5. Admittedly, the appellants/opposite parties have issued a new ATM card to the complainant on expiry of the validity period of the old ATM card. Therefore, after issue of the new ATM card, the respondent/complainant is not supposed to use the old card after receiving the new card and it is the bounden duty of the opposite parties to cancel the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT