According to the complainant, he attempted to withdraw Rs 10,000 from an ATM but failed. (Image generated using AI)A Tamil Nadu consumer commission has ordered an ATM service provider to refund Rs 10,000 to a retired bank customer after holding it liable for “deficiency in service”. The customer’s account was reportedly debited despite the ATM displaying a “transaction declined” message and failing to dispense cash.President P Ganeshram and member S Ravi observed that the act of the ATM service provider in not refunding the debited amount would have caused mental agony to the complainant, and the same has to be compensated.“It would be just and reasonable that the Opposite Party No.2 shall pay a sum of Rs 10,000 to the Complainant towards refund of the debited amount of Rs 10,000 which amount was not dispensed from the ATM of Opposite Party No 2 for the complainant, a sum of Rs10,000 towards compensation for deficiency of service committed to the Complainant, a sum of Rs 5,000 towards compensation for mental agony caused to the Complainant and also pay a sum of Rs 5,000 towards cost of this complaint,” the order read.Cash not dispensedAccording to the complainant, he attempted to withdraw Rs 10,000 from an ATM at Sankagiri on July 3, 2025, but found the machine non-functional.He then used another ATM nearby. During the transaction, the ATM displayed “transaction declined” and did not dispense any cash. However, he allegedly received an SMS informing him that Rs 10,000 had been debited from his bank account.The complainant stated that despite repeatedly approaching the bank and the ATM service provider, sending a registered representation and later a legal notice, the amount was never credited back to his account.He sought a refund of the debited amount along with compensation for mental agony, deficiency in service and litigation expenses.Story continues below this adThe bank denied any deficiency on its part and said that it had promptly raised a dispute with the ATM service provider and subsequently initiated pre-arbitration proceedings after the ATM operator rejected the customer’s claim.The bank stated that they rendered the best possible services to their customers and took maximum efforts to recover the amount. Therefore, it denied any deficiency in service on its part.The ATM service provider was sent notice; however, it did not appear before the commission and failed to file a written version within the mandated time.ATM service provider held liableThe commission noted that the bank had proved that it had taken necessary action on the complaint and therefore held that there was no deficiency in service on its part.The commission observed that the ATM service provider had failed to rebut the complainant’s evidence, which established that the transaction had been declined while the customer’s account had nevertheless been debited. It therefore concluded that the ATM operator was guilty of deficiency in service.“Opposite Party No.2 (ATM service provider) has failed to appear before District Commission and failed to prove its case. Hence, the contention made on the side of the Complainant being undisputed by Opposite Party No.2, the complaint made on the side of the complainant supported with sufficient material evidence has to be accepted,” the order read.The commission therefore directed it to refund Rs 10,000 to the complainant, pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for deficiency in service, Rs 5,000 for mental agony and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs, all within two months.The complaint against the bank and RBI was dismissed.Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Tamil Nadu: 044-28592828) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience. Expertise Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents. Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes: Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts. Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity. Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes: Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law. Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates. Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More Tags:consumer court