DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016
Case No.245/2019
Sh. Devender Pal Singh
S/o Sh. Harbhajan Singh,
R/o Flat No. 16th Pocket- I,
Sheikh Sarai, Phase- II,
New Delhi
….Complainant
Versus
Canara Bank
Through its Branch Manager
Office at Sheikh Sarai, Phase- II,
New Delhi- 110017
….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 29.08.2019
Date of Order : 05.09.2022
Coram:
Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member
ORDER
Member: Ms. Kiran Kaushal
- Succinctly put, complainant maintains a Savings Bank account No.1768101016839 in Canara Bank (OP). Complainant has a passbook and an ATM card issued by OP Bank.
- It is stated that complainant received two messages on 24.11.2018 regarding withdrawal of Rs.13,000/- and Rs.702/- from the complainant’s account, the said transactions were not done by the complainant. Copy of the two messages is annexed as annexure B and C respectively. Complainant on 26.11.2018 complained to OP Bank regarding the fraudulent transactions but did not receive any satisfactory reply from the OP. Complainant approached the mediation centre, wherein the mediation was closed as the OP Bank did not report for mediation. Thereafter, Complainant complained to the Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, New Delhi on 25.02.2019. The Banking Ombudsman closed the case holding no apparent deficiency on part of OP. Copy of the order of Banking Ombudsman is appended at Page 17 of the complaint. Complainant had also filed a complaint in the Police Station vide DD No. 41/B on 01.12.2018, however no money has been received by the complainant till date.
- Thus aggrieved by the order passed by Banking Ombudsman and on account of the loss incurred, complainant approached this Commission to pass an award of Rs.50,000/- with interest from the date of withdrawal of the amount from his account.
- As none appeared on behalf of OP upon service, OP was proceeded against exparte on 10.12.2019. Exparte evidence has been filed on behalf of the complainant. Material placed on record is perused and submissions made by the complainant are heard.
- Averments made in the complaint have remained uncontroverted and unchallenged. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.
6. The Account Statement appended at Page 8 with the complaint reveals that Rs.13,000/- and Rs.702/- were withdrawn from the account of the complainant on 24.11.2018. The SMS alert from the OP Bank appended at Page 9 validates the same. OP has chosen not to appear and file their version.
7. Ombudsman in its order has rejected the claim without going into any fact finding. It has only presumed that Complainant had compromised the MPIN. However, OP has withheld the best evidence. Having been informed on the second day of fraudulent transaction, OP could have collected and preserved CCTV footage of the ATM. In the absence of any CCTV footage or any substantive proof that complainant had compromised MPIN; we find no reason to disbelieve the version of the complainant.
- Order of the Banking Ombudsman is silent on the RBI guidelines dated 06.07.2017. Relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under:-
A circular bearing No.RBI/2017-18/15 DBR.No.Leg.BC.78/09.07.005/2017-18 dated 06.07.2017 on the subject “Customer Protection- Limiting Liability of Customers in Unauthorised Electronic Banking Transactions” states:
Limited Liability of a Customer:
Zero Liability of a Customer
A customers’ entitlement to zero liability shall arise where the unauthorised transaction occurs in the following events:
Contributory fraud/negligence/deficiency on the part of the bank (irrespective of whether or not the transaction is reported by the customer).”
Third party breach where the deficiency lies neither with the bank nor with the customer but lies elsewhere in the system, and the customer notifies the bank within the three working days of receiving the communication from the bank regarding the unauthorized transaction.
Burden of Proof
“The burden of proving customer liability in case of unauthorized banking transaction shall lie on the bank.”
9. In view of the facts and discussion above, we direct OP to refund Rs.13,000/- and Rs.702/- @6% per annum from the date of withdrawal i.e. 24.11.2018 within three months failing which OP Bank shall pay Rs.13,000/- and Rs.702/- @10% per annum till realization.
File be consigned to the record room after giving a copy of the order to the parties as per rules. Order be uploaded on the website.
