JUDGMENT

 Sri A.K.Patra, President

1. This Complaint is presented  by the complainants named above inter alia alleging  negligence & deficiency in service on the part of the Ops for delay in   credit of money transferred through RTGS to their SB Account .
2. The Complainants seek an order directing  the Ops  to settle the RTGS to the joint account of complainants  and to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony and financial loss  and also direct the Ops to pay Rs.10,000/- towards  cost of litigation and further prayed for all other relief(s) as the Honorable Commission may deemed fit & proper .
3. The factual matrix leading to the case of the complainant as emerged from the case record is that, the complainant No.1(one) had transfer an amount of Rs.5,02,000/- through RTGS from his A/c No.100601000007347 of  Indian Overseas Bank (IOB), Koraput on dt.05.08.2022 bearing UTR No.IOBAR52022080500595045 to his joint Saving Account No.12277070927 at Utkal Grameen Bank, Nawarangpur Branch , wherein Complainant no.2(two) is one of the co-account holder but it was  credited to the UGB Account of the complainant.  On the next day the complainant visited his   Bank at Koraput  to enquire about  said RTGS transaction made in the  IOB, Koraput  Branch but found  it   not credited  to his joint Saving Account No. 12277070927 maintained with the said  Utkal Grameen Bank, at Nawarangpur Branch and even after elapsed of two & half months,  said RTGS amount was not credited to the  UGB SB A/C  of the  complainants .The  very purpose of sending money through RTGS  got frustrated for which the  complainant suffered a lot of financial hardship & mental agony . The complainant No.1(one)  at his old age has been visiting the Bank at Koraput  and Nawarangpur time & again to know  about his money sent through RTGS but both the Banks  unable to informed  him  about  the money transferred through said  RTGS  which  caused  anxiety & harassment   highly injurious to his health  at this old age cannot be compensated in any manner. On dt.10.08.2022 the complainant No.1(one)  has made  a  written application to IOB, Koraput  & UGB, Nawarangpur  for needful action  to credit the said amount earliest to their  joint account of  UGB, Nawarangpur  but it was not responded .The  complainant has also approached the OP NO. 3 & 4 in writing but no avail rather caused more anxiety & harassment. It is alleged that, Ops are negligent & deficient in service for not taking action in settlement of the RTGS which  caused financial hardship & mental agony need to be compensated ,hence this  complaint.

1. To substantiate their  claim the complainants have filed the copy of (i) RTGS form duly filled up and submitted to the IOB, Koraput dt.05.08.2022, (ii) Copy of application to the BM,IOB,Koraput,dt.10.08,2022, (iii)copy of application to the GM, IOB, Chennai dt.11.10.2022, (iv) application made to the Chief General Manager, RBI, dt.11.10.2022, (v)  conversations through mail by the  Payment System Monitoring Group dt.19.08.2022,  (vi) conversations through mail by the Payment System Monitoring Group dt.20.08.2022.The averment of the complaint petition is supported by an affidavit of complainant Anntaram Ratha .
2.  On being notice, the Op 1 & 3/ Indian Overseas Bank appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri S.K.Mund and filed their written version admitting the fact that, the complainant is having an account with IOB, Koraput and that ,the complainant has given a withdrawal slip dt.5.08.2022 to remit money from his account through RTGS to his  SB account vide A/c No.12277070927 of UGB, Nawarangpur  and that ,the Opp.Party No.1/ Indian Overseas Bank, Koraput  remitted the said amount of Rs.5,02,000/-  to the said account of Utkal Gramya Bank, Nawarangpur through TRGS  in time but on the next day the complainant made a complaint that, his transaction was not credited to his said UGB account through RTGS .It is further contended that, after  verification of the matter   the OP NO.1  has settled the dispute and  replied the complainant that, his transaction is made sufficient. The same amount is deposited in the bank as per the transaction through RTGS.  The complainant should have made enquiry in UGB, Nawarangpur but complainant did not do the same and on the request of the complainant, the OP No.1 immediately took necessary enquiry from the RTGS Cell Central Office IOB Chennai that, his amount has been deposited in time on 05.08.2022 but as the UGB is sponsored by SBI and using the IFSC Code i.e. SBINORRUKGB the said RTGS amount of the complainant has been routed through SBI and then it will be deposited in the account of UGB Nawarangpur, subsequently to the beneficiary account. It is further submitted that, the SBI did not take step to deposit the amount in UGB on time and hence the OP NO.1 has no mistake and that, as the transaction was made at Koraput branch, this petition is no more coming under the jurisdiction of this Commission and hence liable to be dismissed with cost.
3. To substantiate their  claim the OP 1&3  have filed the copy of Statement of account showing debeted of said amount from the SB account of the complainant Anantaram Ratha with slip of the customer, Application for RTGS ,details of payment order, details of transaction executed & enquiry report. Copy of close deposit receipt transaction. The averment of the written version is supported by an affidavit of one Damodar Mishra, Senior Manager IOB, Koraput .  
4. OP No.2 /Utkal Gramya Bank, Nawarangpur filed its written version through Registered Post stating there in that, the complainant/customer had remitted the money from Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) through RTGS .It is an inward RTGS ,so they have not dealing the RTGS/NEFT at Branch Level .It is dealing in their HEAD Office Level .They have taken necessary steps when the customer made complaint in their  Branch .They  had mail the grievance of the complaints to their  Head Office to take necessary steps to solve the problems. It is further contended that, their Head Office also made several steps to solve the problem and finally solved it but in between the origin and solving the problem takes some time because of some technical errors and there is no fault in the end of OP 2 .
5. The OP 4 appeared through their Authorized Representative Shri B. Basu and   filed their written version. It is submitted that, the main grievance of the complainant is against the IOB, Koraput Branch and UGB, Nawarangpur  Branch and not against the Opp.Party No.4. The complainant does not disclose any cause of action against the OP 4.
6. The OP 4/RBI   further contended that, complaint filed by the complainant was recorded in the CMS application of the RBI bearing No.N202223023191148 on dt. 12.09.2022 and the same were forwarded to the Banks concerned for their submission in the matter. The complaint of the complainants has to be dealt with in accordance with the Clause16(1)(a) read with 10(2)(b)(ii) of RB-IOS,2021. Therefore, the complaint of the complainants was accordingly dealt with by the OP No.4 and the allegation made by the complainant   is out rightly denied by OP 4. In view of the above, the complainants are not entitling for any relief as prayed for against the OP 4. Hence, prayed to dismiss the complaint against the OP 4 .In support of their claim the OP4 has filed the details of the queries raised by this commission along with the relevant guidelines of the RTGS System Regulations,2013 for proper adjudication of this case .
7. The OP 5 appeared through their Learned Counsel Shri S.K.Agrawal and filed their written version. It is submitted that, they are no way connected with the transaction made by the complainant as it relates to Op 1 &2. The Op No.5 is not responsible nor has any deficiency in service for the financial loss & mental agony of the complainant. Hence, prayed to dismiss the complaint against the OP 5.
8. Heard. Peruse the material available on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the submission of both parties present.
9. After perusal of the complaint petition, written version and all the documents relied and placed on record by both the parties, the points for consideration before this Commission is:-Whether the Ops have neglected & deficient in service for  settlement of the RTGS transaction  and  Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed for ?
10. The RTGS System is operated by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and for proper management of RTGS a guideline i.e. Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013  issued by the RBI which prescribes the compensation to be paid for delay in credit /return of RTGS transaction are reproduced below :-“11.4. In case of any delay in providing credit to the beneficiary’s account, the recipient / beneficiary’s bank has to pay compensation at current repo rate plus 2% to the beneficiary customer for each day delay .In case of delay in credit on the same day ,a compensation for a day shall be paid to the customer. The compensation amount should be credited to the customer’s account automatically without any request. “ 
11. We may quote the following relevant guideline from chapter 14 of the Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013 regarding  “Sub- membership in RTGS “ are follows :-. “14.2. The sponsor banks would be responsible for sending / receiving the transactions / messages on behalf of their sub-member(s). 14.3. The obligations and duties in respect of customer transactions viz. timely credit and return are applicable to the sub-members also.  14.6. The settlement of transactions by/on the sub-members would take place in the settlement accounts of the sponsor banks maintained with Reserve Bank of India. The sponsor bank under this arrangement will assume complete responsibility for the settlement of all transactions pertaining to their respective sub-members. 14.7. The sponsor bank at all times should ensure that, their sub-member/s adhere to and abide by the rules, regulations, operational requirements, instructions, orders, decisions etc, of the RTGS system, as laid down by Reserve Bank of India from time to time. 14.8. Redressal of all customer complaints / grievance would be the responsibility of the sponsor bank. To aid in this process, the sponsor bank should ensure that the sub-member/s have put in place a transparent and robust mechanism to resolve customer complaints in a quick and efficient manner, as laid down in the procedural guidelines, business rules and regulations of the RTGS system. 14.9. All disputes between the sponsor bank and the sub-member/s will be handled bilaterally amongst them.”
12. The , the contention of RBI /OP 4 that, the beneficiary bank is the State Bank of India (SBI) –which is the direct member in  RTGS.  Utkal Grameen Bank (UGB) is being sponsored by SBI is participating in RTGS system as a sub-member of SBI so also,   the contention of OP 1&2  that,  the UGB is sponsored by SBI and using the IFSC Code i.e. SBINORRUKGB the said RTGS amount of the complainant has been routed through SBI and then it will be deposited in the account of UGB Nawarangpur, subsequently to the beneficiary account and that, the SBI did not take step to deposit the amount in UGB on time is not disputed rather remaining  unchallenged
13. Here, in this case there is no dispute that , the complainant is having an SB A/C  with IOB, Koraput and that ,the complainant has given a withdrawal slip dt.5.08.2022 to remit money from his account through RTGS transaction with UTR No. IOBAR52022080500595045 initiated by the IOB, Koraput  on 5^th August 2022 to UGB ,Nawarangpur vide  A/c No.12277070927  i.e. joint account of the complainants but said  transaction was not credited to his UGB account on the same day for which the complainant on ondt.10.08.2022 has made a  written application to IOB, Koraput & to UGB, Nawarangpur  for needful action  to credit the said amount to the  joint account  of the complainants but it was not responded .The complainant raised a complainant which was recorded in the CMS application of the OP 4/RBI bearing No.N202223023191148 on dt. 12.09.2022. Subsequently said RTGS transaction dt.5.08.2022 was settled on dt 03.11.2022 and credited the said amount of Rs. 5,02,000/-  in SB A/c No.12277070927  of the complainants there maintaining with the Utkal Grameen Bank, Nawarangpur is too late .
14. Admittedly there is delayed of 90 days for settlement of RTGS transaction & to credit the same to the account of the complainants without fault of the complainants certainly caused financial hardship & mental agony to the complainant may not be discarded.
15. The RTGS System is introduced by the RBI for quick & secured transfer of money of the customer of banks but it is found that the very purpose is frustrated. The complainant raised a complainant which was recorded in the CMS application of the OP 4/RBI bearing No.N202223023191148 on dt. 12.09.2022 but no avail .No prompt fruitful action has been taken by the OP4/RBI authority though they are duty bound to protect the interest of each & every consumer of banking service of the Nation and more specifically duty bound to protect the interest of the complainant .Here in the present facts & circumstances we found negligence & deficiency in service on the part of the OP4/RBI authority to protect the interest of the complainant certainly caused financial hardship & mental agony to the complainants .
16. Transaction of money through RTGS is guided under Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013 which prescribes the compensation to be paid for delay in credit /return of RTGS transaction as discussed above.
17. The contention of RBI /OP 4 is that, the prevalent RBI Repo Rate during the relevant period i.e. dt. 05.08.2022 to 22.09.2022 was 5.40 % and for the period of 30.09.2022 to 03.11.2022 it was 5.90 % remaining undisputed /unchallenged. Accordingly, the complainants are entitled for compensation as per Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013 as follows:- (i) for delay first 55 days i.e. from  05.08.22 to 29.09.2022  @ 7.40% p.a (i.e. @  5.40 %+2%)  of the RTGS amount of Rs. 5,02,000/  i.e. 7.40% x 5,02,000 divided by 365 days x 55 days  =Rs.5,597.64 . And for next delay of 35 days i.e. from 30.09.2022 to 3.11.2022 @ 7.90 % p.a  (i.e. @ 5.90% + 2%)  of the RTGS amount of Rs 5,02,000/ i.e. 7.90%p.a   x5,02,000/- divided by 365 days x 35 days =Rs.3,802.82.Total compensation amount  of Rs. 5,597.64 + Rs.3,802.82 = Rs.9,400.46/-is payable to the complainants .
18. Based on the aforesaid discussion, we are of the opinion that, there is negligence & deficiency in service on the part of UGB, Koraput and its sponsor Bank (SBI) ,so also we found negligence & deficiency in service on the part of OP4/RBI authorities causing financial hardship & mental agony to the complainants as such they are jointly liable to release the accrued compensation to the complainant computed above as per the provision of Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013 of RBI and further liable to pay litigation cost not less than Rs. 10,000/-to the complainant . The OP 2/UGB, Nawarangpur  is at liberty to  claim said amount of compensation & cost amount  from its sponsor Bank (SBI) on their own cost. Hence it is ordered.

                                                                                                     O R D E R

This consumer complaint is allowed in part on contest against the UGB, Nawarangpur /OP 2  & OP 4/RBI and dismissed against the other  Opp.Parties with the  following direction :-

1. The UGB, Nawarangpur /OP 2(two) is here by directed to pay compensation Rs. Rs.9,400.46/-(Nine thousand four hundred forty six paisa) only along with litigation cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the complaints.
2.  it is further directed to comply the aforesaid order within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order falling which the UGB,   Nawarangpur /OP 2   shall be liable to pay Rs.200/-(two hundred) per day as punitive damages/compensation to the complainants till compliance of this order.
3. The OP 2/UGB, Nawarangpur is at liberty to claim the aforesaid awarded amount from its sponsor Bank (SBI) on their own cost   .
4. The OP 4/RBI authority is here by directed to ensure timely release of said compensation amount accrued as per the Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) System Regulations, 2013 of RBI to the SB A/C of complainants.

The pending application if any is also stands disposed off accordingly.

Dictated & corrected by me.

                     Sd/-

I agree.

Pronounced in open Commission forum today on this  23^rd  August 2023 under the seal and signature of this Commission .The pending application if any is also stands disposed off accordingly.

 Free copy of this order be supplied to the respective parties or they may      download the same from the Confonet to treat the same as copy of the order receipt from this Commission. Order accordingly.