Punjab

Faridkot

CC/23/138

Swaran Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Limited - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

23 Jul 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FARIDKOT

 

           Complaint No. :             138 of 2023

Date of Institution :         20.12.2023

Date of Decision :            23.07.2024

 

Swaran Singh aged about 48 years, son of Kapoor Singh, resident of Village Dod, Tehsil and District Faridkot.                            

                         .....Complainant

Versus

 

Branch Manager, I.C.I.C.I Bank Limited, Branch Sadiq, District Faridkot.

 

..........OPs

 

Complaint under Section 35 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Quorum:     Sh Rakesh Kumar Singla, President,

                     Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member.

Present:       Sh Swaran Singh, Complainant in person,

                     OP-Exparte.

 

* * * * * *

ORDER

(Rakesh Kumar Singla, President)

                                           Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against OPs seeking directions to remove all the disputed entries of Rs.29,903/-from the account of complainant and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/-as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/-.

 2                                   Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is having bank account bearing no.357101500791 with OP Bank and he has also been

cc no.-138 of 2023

issued credit card with limit of Rs.30,000/-by the Bank. It is pertinent to mention here that even since the day of issuance of said credit card, complainant has not got the same operative and even has not set its password. He has never used the limit and has not made any transaction with said credit card. It is alleged that on 29.03.2023, entries have been shown to be made through his credit card and an amount of Rs.29,903/-was debited from his account through said credit card. Complainant has alleged that he never received any message nor any call in this regard and even no link was ever received on his mobile phone, but huge amount of Rs.29,903/-was debited from his account. Complainant immediately approached OP and narrated entire story to Bank officials, but they did not bother to hear his genuine request and did not redress his grievance. After that complainant made complaint before the Sr Superintendent of Police, Faridkot in this regard but till date no action has been taken by Police. Complainant has prayed that due to negligence of OP, huge amount of Rs.29,903/-has been debited from his account, which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides the main relief. Hence, the instant complaint.

3                                                  Ld Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 27.12.2023, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                          As per office report, notice containing copy of complaint alongwith relevant documents was sent to OP through registered post, but it did not receive back undelivered. Statutory period expired, but nobody appeared in the Commission either in person or through counsel to contest the allegations of complainant. Therefore, after long waiting till 4 O’ clock, when

cc no.-138 of 2023

nobody appeared on behalf of Opposite Party, then vide order dated 06.03.2024, OP was proceeded against exparte.

5                                          Proper opportunity was given to complainant to lead evidence to prove his pleadings. Complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex C-1, Credit Card description Ex C-2, application moved by complainant before Sr. Superintendent of Police, Faridkot alongwith Report given by Police Station, Sadiq Ex C-3, credit card statement dated 12.04.2023 Ex C-4, Dispute Form dated 01.09.2023Ex C-5, documents Ex C-6 to 7 and then, closed the evidence.

6                                      As Opposite Party is exparte,  and there is no rebuttal from OP’s side, therefore, documents furnished by complainant alongwith complaint are taken into consideration.

7                                               We have heard the exparte arguments and pleadings put forward by complainant himself and have carefully gone through and perused the evidence and documents placed on record.

8                                              We have anxiously considered the contentions in the light of evidence on record. As Opposite party is exparte, therefore, there is no rebuttal from OP’s side.

9                                                  Careful perusal of document Ex C-3 which is copy of complaint moved by complainant before Sr Superintendent of Police reveals the fact that without generating any pin and without his consent, amount of Rs.29,903/-was wrongly debited from his account. No message in this regard was sent to complainant. As per this application, seven debit entries were made from his credit card, but complainant has alleged that he never used his credit card nor

cc no.-138 of 2023

availed any facility of making transaction from his credit card.  It is observed that when he did not set any password, then how it became operative. No information in this regard was sent to complainant by OP bank either through message or e-mail and there is no doubt that his mobile number is duly registered with Opposite party bank. If complainant had himself withdrawn this amount, he would not have made complaint before SSP, Faridkot. He approached Police, because OP did not bother to hear his grievance.

10                                               Grievance of the complainant is that despite several visits,  requests and submissions made by complainant before OP Bank and even after complaint before SSP, Faridkot, OP did not do anything needful and it has failed to redress his grievance which amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. He has prayed for imparting justice.

11                                                     It is important to note since the day of issuance of said credit card, complainant has not got the same operative and even has not set its password. Meaning thereby, he could not use the said credit card without generating PIN. Thus, he has never used the limit and has not made any transaction with said credit card. OP bank is fully aware that this withdrawal is totally unauthorized, it is not done by complainant and even despite repeated requests by complainant, bank has not taken any appropriate action against this withdrawal by someone. It is observed that failure on the part of OP to protect the money of its account holders and negligence on their part to take quick action against such frauds, amounts to deficiency in service. Bank has failed to place on record any document to prove that what kind of action bank has taken to stop such activities. Bank just received complaint from complainant and did nothing to redress his grievance. No efforts are made by OP/Bank to find the culprits or to resolve the

cc no.-138 of 2023

issue. Complainant has produced sufficient and cogent evidence to prove his case. All documents brought on record by him are fully authentic and are beyond any doubt.

12                                              The learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant never generated any password and his account was inoperative. These transactions were made by some third person by playing fraud upon him. On 31.03.2023 complainant requested OP to close his credit card and to reverse the entries through which his huge amount of Rs.29,903/-was withdrawn from his account. Complainant immediately reported the matter to Bank, and thus having sufficient notice of complaint made by complainant and withdrawal caused to the account of complainant, OP bank is liable to pay for the same as complainant reported the entire issue to OP within prescribed period of seven days for which only bank is liable to compensate. Ld counsel for complainant has placed on record copy of citation in State Bank of India Vs P. V. George,(Kerala): Law Finder Doc ID #1360707 2019 (1) KLT 505 : 2019 (1) Ker L. J.. 848 : 2019 AIR (Kerala) 140: 2019 (1) KHC 515 wherein it is clearly stated that Unauthorised withdrawal from accounts of customers – SMS alerts cannot be the basis for determining the liability of the customer unless there exists a specific term in the contract between a bank and its customer to the effect that the bank would be exonerated from the liability in connection with the unauthorised transactions if the customer does not respond to the SMS alerts. Banking- Unauthorised withdrawal from accounts of customers – If a customer suffers loss on account of the transactions not authorised by customers, bank is liable to customer for the said loss.

13                                                 From the above discussion and evidence and pleadings put forward by parties, it is made out that there is deficiency in service

cc no.-138 of 2023

 

on the part of OP. It is observed bank failed to protect the amount of complainant. Negligence on the part of bank is clearly visible as they have failed to safeguard the amount of complainant and even bank has not placed on record any documentary evidence to prove that  even a single effort was ever made by bank to resolve the issue. Bank itself means to rely upon, but it is observed that public money is not safe even in bank accounts. Bank cannot be exonerated from its duty by merely not preferring to contest the allegations of complainant. Had any efforts were made by OP Bank to check and safeguard the account of complainant, such huge frauds would not have happened. There is nothing on record to show what checks have been imposed or made by OP to safeguard the public money and what kind of necessary action they should initiate when such issues are brought into their notice. Bank is fully liable to pay the loss suffered by complainant. As the Consumer Protection Act is for the welfare and benefit of consumers and it is meant for preserving their rights, therefore, complaint in hand is hereby partly allowed.

14                                           OP Bank is directed to reverse the entries regarding amount of Rs.29,903/-debited through the credit card of complainant to his account alongwith interest at the rate of 6% from the date of order passed in present complaint by this Commission till the date of final realization. OP is further directed to pay Rs.3,000/-to complainant as compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him alongwith Rs.1000/-for litigation expenses.

15                                            Compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be entitled to proceed as per Consumer Protection Act. 

 

cc no.-138 of 2023

16                                                  Complaint could not be decided within stipulated period due to heavy pendency of work and incomplete quorum.

17                                      Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law.

18                                           File be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Commission :

Dated: 23.07.2024             

 

(Param Pal Kaur)           (Rakesh Kumar Singla)

                                           Member                         President