CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION – X

GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

    Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area

             (Behind Qutub Hotel)

    New Delhi – 110016

    Case No.244/17

Joy Kurian

S/o Thomas Kurian, Aged 48 Years

706-708, Bhandari House, 91

Nehru Place, New Delhi-19

Now residing at :

89/N, Sector-4, Pushp Vihar Saket

New Delhi-17.                                                                   …..Petitioner No.1

Vs.

1.                      ICICI Bank

Represented by its Chairman

ICICI Bank Towers South Tower

West Wing, 2^nd Floor Bandra Kurla Complex

Mumbai: 400 051                                           .…Opposite Party No.1

The Branch Manager

ICICI Bank Ltd.

65 Jyothi Building

Chandra Building

Nehru place, New Delhi-110019.              …..Opposite Party No.2

Date of Institution-31.07.2017

            Date of Order- 10.11.2023 

                                                O R D E R

RITU GARODIA-MEMBER

1.  The complaint pertains to deficiency in banking services on part of OP.

2. The complainant holds a saving bank account with OP bearing No.629401121582. On 30.04.2017, the complainant tried to withdraw Rs.10,000/- through his ICICI Bank ATM Debit Card No.4693 7501 6206 from Punjab National Bank, ATM Machine ID No. N5012100, Lothian Road, Near Election Off., Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi.  The transaction was declined due to non-availability of cash.  He again tried to withdraw cash from Bank of Baroda ATM, M/c ID No. 1RDNNDL02 and ICICI Bank ATM ID No. S1CW5838 at Kashmire Gate, Delhi.  The transaction was declined stating ‘unauthorised card usage.’

3. On 01.05.2017, the complainant received 9 SMS (Text messages) stating that a sum of Rs.82,500/- has been debited from his account. He immediately lodged the complaint with OP on the same day.  He was told that seven working days would be required for rectification.  Despite repeated follow-ups and correspondence, OP neither responded to complainant’s queries nor resolved the issue. 

4. Complainant lodged another complaint and submitted a Card Member Dispute form.  He received an e-mail from OP dated 23.05.2017 stating that pre-arbitration request has been raised on the acquiring Bank on 11.05.2017 for which a turn-around time was 17 days. 

5. On 11.6.2017, the complainant received another SMS from OP stating   “Dear Customer, transaction of INR2000 using Debit Card for Acct XX1582 was declined on 11.06.2017 as you have entered the details of expired/closed card’. He also received similar kind of message on 18.06.2017.  The complainant believes that all these transactions were fraudulent electronics transactions carried out with the help of an insider.

6. On 07.07.2017, the complainant received an e-mail from OP stating that the claim with the acquiring bank (Punjab National Bank) has been rejected by National Payment Corporation of India (NPCI) in the pre-arbitration process.  It was further intimated that OP Bank will be unable to reverse the disputed transaction amount.  It was further stated that the details of the transaction have been provided to acquiring bank to provide the ATM clippings.  The complainant submits that NPCI is a mere settlement agency with no power of adjudication.

7. The complainant has also relied on RBI circular DBR No.Leg.BC 78/09.07.005/2017-18 (Customer Protection–Limited Liability of Customers in Unauthorised Electronic Banking Transactions). The complainant also sent a legal notice dated 10.07.2017.

8. The complainant prays for refund of Rs.82,500/- with 12% interest p.a., Rs.50,000/- as compensation and cost.

9. OP in its reply has admitted that the complainant has a saving bank account and has received 9 SMS from the Bank due for withdrawal of money through ATM card.  OP submits that these transactions were successful.

10. OP underscores that the complainant has used his ATM card for withdrawal as correct PIN is only known to him.  OP had conducted an inquiry on receipt of complaint.  OP has denied involvement of any internal personnel in these disputed transactions.

11. OP further submits that NPCI had rejected the claim.  OP had also requested for ATM footage from the acquiring bank and are still waiting for confirmation.  OP has denied receiving any legal notice.  OP prays for dismissal of claim.

12. Complainant has filed evidence and exhibited the following documents:

1. Copy of Summery of Account is exhibited as Annexure C/1.
2. Copy of ATM Slip is exhibited as Annexure C/2.
3. Details of the SMS alert messages is exhibited as Annexure C/3.
4. Copy of Card Member Dispute form is exhibited as Annexure C/4.
5. Details of Email sent in response by OP is exhibited as Annexure C/5.
6. Copy of Mobile Screenshot is exhibited as Annexure C/6.
7. Copy of details of email from OP regarding pre-arbitration raised in NPCI is exhibited as Annexure C/7.
8. Copy of RBI Circular is exhibited as Annexure C/8.
9. Copy of Legal Notice dated 10.07.2017 is exhibited as Annexure C/9.
10. Copy of Police complaint is exhibited as Annexure C/10.

13. OP has also filed evidence by way of affidavit but has neither annexed nor exhibited any documents.

14. We have considered the material on record.  It is undisputed that complainant is a customer of OP bank and is holding a saving bank account.  It is also undisputed that an ATM Debit Card was issued to the complainant by OP.

15. A transaction slip dated 30.04.2017 at 14:55 by Punjab National Bank shows that transaction was declined.   The SMS alert messages shows that 9 transactions (cash withdrawal) took place from the complainant bank account from 8:23:44 A.M. to 2:37:06 A.M.  The statement of account indicates that within these nine transaction, a total of Rs.82,500/- was debited from complainant’s account.

16. An e-mail dated 23.05.2017 from OP to complainant shows that a pre- arbitration has been raised on the acquiring bank and the process will take seventeen days.

17. OP has sent another e-mail dated 07.07.2017 which is as follows-

“On receipt of your first complaint dated 01.05.2017 regarding the discrepancy in cash withdrawal of Rs.82,500/- dated 01/05/2017 from Punjab National Bank ATM, we have initiated the claim on 01.05.2017, on your behalf, with Punjab National Bank (acquiring bank).

We have received a revert from Punjab National Bank claimingthat the transactionis successful, which was informed to you vide our email dated 09.05.2017.

The claim made by us on your behalf was rejected by the committee of NPCI claiming that the transaction is successful”.

18.  OP has also submitted in its reply that they have requested for ATM clipping and they are still waiting for the confirmation from the acquiring bank i.e. Punjab National Bank.

19. OP has not given details/JP/EJ ATM logs as received from the acquiring bank. As per the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) circular NPCI/2012/13/NFS/2737 dated 26.03.2013, in case of the disputed transaction, the acquirer bank must provide three transactions before and three transactions after the ‘Disputed transaction’ in the JP/EJ ATM logs.

20. OP bank received this complaint, conducted ana enquiry and raised a pre-arbitration request. OP could have easily confirmed the sequence of event from CCTV footage. In fact, OP in its reply has stated that a request for CCTV footage has been made to Punjab National Bank.  However, this averment of OP is not substantiated by any document/email made to acquiring bank.

21. Hon’ble Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in FA No. 1020/2014, decided on 01.03.2023, titled as ‘State Bank of India Vs. Ms. Madhu Chawla’ held that non supply of copy of CCTV to the complainant shall amount to deficiency in service on the part of the bank. Also, in FA No. 59/2017 titled as “ICICI Bank Ltd. vs Ms. Nalini Sirohi & Anr.” decided on 13.10.2022, it has been observed by the Hon’ble Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission that:

13. We are of the view that the Appellant has failed to discharge its duty as the concerned official of the Appellant failed to provide any of the above-mentioned report or CCTV footage of the concerned ATM to the Respondent No.1 and even failed to file any evidence relating to the same before the District Commission as well as before this Commission to prove that money had been collected by the respondent No.1 on the subject day.

22. The factum of withdrawal of cash by complainant or any third person would have been clear if CCTV footage was examined. The OP bank are still waiting for confirmation of CCTV footage from acquiring bank.

23. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commission finds OPs guilty of deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and following directions are passed:-

1. OP is directed to pay Rs.82,500/- with interest @9% from the date of withdrawal till realization.
2. OP is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and the discomfort caused due to deficiency   in service inclusive of litigation charges.

24. File be consigned to record room.  Order be uploaded on the website.