Haryana

Ambala

CC/285/2016

Mr. Puneet Chopra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Axis Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Sumit Sharma

03 Jan 2018

ORDER

               BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMBALA.

                                                     Complaint No. 285 of 2016.

      Date of Institution: 22.07.2016.

      Date of final order: 03.01.2018.

 

Punjeet Chopra 120 Housing Board Colony, Ambala Cantt.Haryana.

 

                                                                 .….Complainant.

                                       Versus

1. AXIS Bank, J.L.N Marg, Jagadhari Road, Ambala Cantt. Haryana.
2. The Circle Head, Axis Bank Ltd. Sec-20, Panchkula,Haryana.
3.  

                                                          …..Opposite parties.

                          Complaint under section 12 of

 

Before: Sh.Dina Nath Arora, President.

    Smt.Anamika Gupta, Member.

            Sh.Pushpender Kumar, Member.   

 

Present:   Sh. Sumit Sharma, Adv. for complainant.

               Sh. I.S.Gill, Adv. for opposite parties.

                             

ORDER

 

             The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is having saving account No.432010100205108 with OP No.1 and as per Banking Rules and Regulations, the OPs are under obligation of secrecy and have a contract with their customers for privacy and confidentiality and they cannot disclose any kind of information regarding the bank account to anybody without the consent of the holder of the account.  The wife of the complainant left the matrimonial home on 03.07.2011 and had filed case for maintenance against the complainant before Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.), Ludhiana and during the course of proceedings she had placed details of the bnk account of the complainant. She had misused the statement of account of the complainant in order to cover up her false and frivolous story. The complainant is having doubt that either the OPs or any official of their bank has disclosed such information, which shows that the OPs have breached the contact of secrecy, privacy and confidentiality and it all happened without the consent and permission from the complainant. The complainant requested the OPs to compensate because they have been failed to protect the confidential, private and sensitive date of the complainant and also got served legal notice upon them but to no avail. The act and conduct of the OPs clearly amounts to deficiency in service on their part. In evidence, the complainant has tendered his affidavit Annexure CW1/A and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C3.

 2.                    On notice OPs appeared and filed their joint reply wherein several preliminary objections such as maintainability, cause of action, estoppal, limitation and concealment of material facts from this Forum have been taken. The OPs are treating its customers’ personal information as private and confidential and never disclosed any information to any other person and even no statement of account has ever been supplied to the wife of the complainant. The wife of the complainant is family member of the complainant and is residing with him. The OPs have never disobeyed the master circular of Reserve Bank of India. There is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Other contentions made in the complaint have been controverted and prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. In evidence the OPs have tendered affidavit Annexure RA and document Annexure R1.

3.             We have heard learned counsel of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the OPs have committed violation of the circular of Reserve Bank of India qua keeping the information of the bank account details of her firm secretly as mentioned in Section 5 & 7 of Code of Bank’s Commitment to customers. He further relied upon Section 43-A of Information Technology Act, 2011 which says that Sensitive personal data or information of a person means such personal information which consists of information relating to financial information such as Bank account or credit card or debit card or other payment instruction details.  In support of his contentions he has placed reliance of case law titled as Sh.Amit Mittal Vs. Mr.Hemant Kumar decided by Hon’ble State Commission, Delhi on 10.09.2012 in Complaint case No.2009/144 wherein it has been held that The availability of said account to third party, which subscribed it in the civil court, is therefore, a flagrant violation of confidential relationship between a Bank and a customer (consumer) and is a betrayal of trust which not only calls for an alarm and dismay, but also for adequate financial compensation.

4.                     Undisputedly, the complainant is having account with the Ops. The complainant has come with the plea that the Ops had issued his statement of account to his wife which she had produced during the litigation pending between them. In support of his contentions he has placed on file document such as Annexure C1 (statement of account).

5.                     After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on the case file it is crystal clear that the allegations levelled by the complainant are based on assumption and presumption as there is no credible evidence on the case file to prove her allegations because in para No.9 of the complaint he herself has mentioned that he is having doubt that either the Ops or any official of their bank has disclosed such information for some kind of consideration or interest. Though the complainant has produced his affidavit Annexure CW1/A and documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C3 in his evidence but these documents alongwith other evidence placed on file by the complainant do not show that the OPs were/are deficient in providing service and moreover these documents do no indicate that the computerized statement of account, if any, produced by wife of the complainant during the proceedings of litigation pending between them was delivered to her by the OPs. The complainant has failed to prove on the case file that the OPs are deficient in providing service to her and committed violation of the circular of Reserve Bank of India qua keeping the information of the bank account details of her firm secretly as mentioned in Section 5 & 7 of Code of Bank’s Commitment to customers. The verdict made in case titled as  Sh.Amit Mittal Vs. Mr.Hemant Kumar (supra) is not disputed but the same is not applicable in the present case and is hereby distinguished.

6.                Hence, in view of above discussed factual position we are of the considered view that the present complaint is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merit leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of cost.  File be consigned after due compliance.

 

Announced on: 03.01.2018

 

                                                                (D.N.Arora)

(Pushpender Kumar)  (Anamika Gupta       )       President,

Member              Member                 District Consumer Disputes                                                               Redressal Forum, Ambala