View 248 Cases Against Sbi Card
Raghaw Chaudhary filed a consumer case on 15 Dec 2023 against Manager, SBI Card in the DF-II Consumer Court. The case no is CC/1171/2019 and the judgment uploaded on 19 Dec 2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II
U.T. CHANDIGARH
Consumer Complaint No. | : | 1171/2019 |
Date of Institution | : | 12.12.2019 |
Date of Decision | : | 15.12.2023 |
Raghaw Chaudhary, aged 49 years, son of Sh.Mukh Ram Chaudhary, Resident of H.No.4128, Mauli Jagran Complex, UT, Chandigarh
... Complainant
Manager, SBI Card, SCO No.171-172, Ground Floor, Sector 8, Chandigarh
MR.B.M.SHARMA MEMBER
Present: | Sh.Anurag Kaushik, Adv. proxy for Sh.Atul Kaushik, Counsel for the complainant Sh.Kartik, Adv. proxy for Sh.Sandeep Suri, Counsel for OPs.
|
PER B.M.SHARMA, MEMBER
Concisely put, the case of the complainant is that he was having SBI Credit Card No.5172527725759339 valid upto 08/2023 (Ann.C-1) and got it closed on 8/9.5.2019. Thereafter, he received another/new Credit Card No.5172527729424484 issued by OP in his name, though he never applied for it (Ann.C-4). It is stated that on 27.9.2019 the complainant received the call from Mobile No.8587018233 explaining him that he is from SBI Cards and wanted to know about the number of his credit card and the caller made a call to the complainant in a way while persuading him to insist about the card number and later on enquired about the last three digits numbers of the Card on its back. It is stated that immediately after the call, the complainant received a message that an amount of Rs.49,999/- had been deducted from his card account, whereas no such transaction was done by the complainant. It is submitted that the complainant was in a great shock and on 8.10.2019, he again received a telephonic call from mobile No. 8860189299 and the same enquiries were put in by the caller and after that end of the call, the complainant again was in receipt of message with regard to the deduction of Rs.49,999/- from his card account. Accordingly the complainant approached the police and submitted his complaint dated 9.10.2019 whereupon the police registered a complaint dated 9.10.2019 vide Ref. No. PW201919456 (Ann.C-2 & C-3) and the matter is still in progress. It is stated that the complainant was again in receipt of telephonic calls stating therein that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest and penalties were added to his credit card account and he had to pay the same. Alleging the said act & conduct of the OP as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, hence this complaint has been preferred.
2] The OP has filed written version stating that the complainant approached the answering OP and paid the outstanding dues. It is stated that that the complainant himself blocked his earlier card & requested the answering OP for re-issuance of card facility, as such, on the basis of his request, the OP provided the credit card to the complainant. It is denied that the answering OP had called the complainant as alleged. It is pleaded that it is the complainant himself who made the said transaction and filed the frivolous complaint just to create pressure upon the OP to accept his illegal demands. It is also pleaded that the transactions alleged by the complainant were not fraudulent transactions as alleged, as the transactions were valid transaction. It is stated that the transaction had been performed in a secured manner as the same had been validated by Card CVV and dynamic One Time Password (OTP) over the Internet/IVR. It is asserted that the dynamic One Time Password (OTP) was successfully delivered at the registered mobile number of the complainant and that no transaction could be done without sharing confidential details of the card i.e. card expiry date, CVV wherein, the answering OP always advise their cardholders not to share their card details i.e. card expiry date, CVV etc. to any third party. It is pleaded that SBI Card has implemented Dynamic OTP as an additional factor of authentication for Online (3D)/Card not present transactions (CNP) providing enhanced level of security to all CNP transactions and therefore, considering all of circumstances, the liability towards the lapse is of the complainant only. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying other assertions, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3] Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4] We have heard the ld.Counsel for the contesting parties and thoroughly perused the documents on record.
5] The perusal of the file & record reveals that the complainant himself has admitted to have shared the credentials of his credit card including its numbers and last three digit numbers of the card with another person, though believing it to be from some SBI Card Official, therefore, no fault or deficiency in service for said transactions, can be attributed towards the OP. Moreover the matter has already been reported to the Police Authorities and in case anything substantial is found in the police investigation favouring the complainant, he would be entitled for the refund of the said amount as well as to avail legal remedy available to him.
6] In view of the above facts & circumstances of the case & discussion, no deficiency in service, at this stage, is made out against the OP. Therefore, the complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
Certified copy of this order be sent to the parties, free of charge. After compliance, file be consigned to record room.
15.12.2023 Sd/-
(SURJEET KAUR)
PRESIDING MEMBER
Sd/-
(B.M.SHARMA)
MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.