West Bengal

Rajarhat

CC/66/2022

Bodhisattawa Mukherjee, S/o Late Santosh Kumar Mukherjee - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, State Bank of India, PBB Branch - Opp.Party(s)

Mr Mauli Nath Mukherjee

15 Mar 2022

ORDER

Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajarhat (New Town )
Kreta Suraksha Bhavan,Rajarhat(New Town),2nd Floor
Premises No. 38-0775, Plot No. AA-IID-31-3, New Town,P.S.-Eco Park,Kolkata - 700161
 
Complaint Case No. CC/66/2022
( Date of Filing : 08 Mar 2022 )
 
1. Bodhisattawa Mukherjee, S/o Late Santosh Kumar Mukherjee
Flat No.2C2,LIG-2,Greenwood Sonata,New Town,Police Station-Eco Park,Kolkata-700157
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, PBB Branch
Santosh Chamber,Ground Floor,Action Area II,New TownPolice Station-Eco Park,Kolkata-700157
2. Banking Ombudsman,Reserve Bank of India
15,Nataji Subhash Road,Police Station-Hare Street,Kolkata-700001
3. Tapan Das
73/1,Khetra Mitra Lane,Police Station-Golabari,Howrah-711106
4. Nobroker Technologies Solutions Pvt.Ltd
Bren Mercury,No.835/39,Kaikondrahalli,Varthur Hobli,Sarjapur Main Road,Bangalore,Karnataka-560035
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Mr Mauli Nath Mukherjee, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 15 Mar 2022
Final Order / Judgement

Today is fixed for admission hearing. After hearing the Ld. Advocate and perusing the complaint we find that the complainant supplied his debit card pin on being asked by some fraudster and after hearing the KYC details from him. It is the next case of the complainant that by using the debit card the said fraudster a sum of Rs. 40,000/- from his savings bank account on 15th May, 2020. He has put on all the blames upon the State Bank of India and has sought for reliefs from them. It is a clear cut case of Cyber Crime. We are unable to hold the bank liable with the illegal transaction made by unknown person on 15.05.2020. It may be pertinent to mention here that the Bank Ombudsman once considered his case and rejected the complainant prayer for compensation. There is hardly any scope to drawn interference that there was none but the SBI to supply the KYC of the complainant. It cannot be stated, by any stretch of imagination, that the bank was a party to the crime which was committed on 15.05.2020. Prima facie case as against the bank is not found for which we are of the view that it is not a fit case for admission.

Hence it is ordered that the case be and the same is dismissed as being not admitted.

Let plain copy be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR.

 

Dictated and Corrected by

 

[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. Silpi Majumder]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.