Delhi

New Delhi

CC/279/2017

Shobhna Sarbhai - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Axis Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

18 Nov 2019

ORDER

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI),

 ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

 NEW DELHI-110001

 

    Case No.C.C./279/2017                                                             Dated:

                In the matter of:

               Ms. Shobna Sarbhai

               W/o Dr. Sanjeev Saxena

    C/o Dr. G.P. Sarbhai  R/o. D 3 A

    DDA Flats Munirka, New Delhi,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                …..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

     M/s. Axis Bank  Ltd.

      Statesman House, 148 Barakhamba Road

                  New Delhi – 110001

.... OPPOSITE PARTY

 

                 ARUN KUMAR ARYA - PRESIDENT

 

                                                      ORDER

 

The crux of the complaint is that the complainant had Bank Account No. 007010100060312 with the OP Bank at Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. It is alleged that  a criminal complaint bearing  CC No. 48726 of 2016 titled as  Ms Shobna Sarbhai vs. Dr. Sanjeev Seaxena and others is pending before the court of ld. M.M. Court No. 21 , Patiala House, New Delhi against  her in-laws and husband residents of Jaipur. It is also alleged that her husband Dr. Sanjeev Saxena  had two bank accounts with the OP Bank namely Account no. 912010068443767 in Gopalpura branch  Jaipur and Account no. 62601000440301 in Malviya Nagar Branch  Jaipur. It is also alleged that her husband  is a rich and influential person and maintains very huge balance in his accounts and has no liability except to look after  and take care of the complaint  being his wife  and baby Aaradhya Saxena who is suffering from Autism requiring extensive  daily sessions of speech theraphy for treatment of her disability. The treatment is quite expensive and have to be borne by the complainant with the help of borrowings from her retired parents. The complainant is unable to do a job due to serious illness of her daughter. 

It is alleged that  in the said  case before the M.M.,  the husband of the complainant  Sh. Sanjeev Saxena  has filed copies  of statements of account of the complainant for the period 01/04/2008 to 30/09/2016, running into 50 pages  printed from computer URL no. 10.0.22.102.8081 on 07/11/2016. It is alleged that the OP in utter violation of the banking rules and regulations  had leaked out  and  shared  the complainant’s personal information and the details of said bank account without her permission causing her physical, mental, emotional and financial distress on this account. It is also alleged that the OP Bank is duty bound to adhere, comply  and observe the maintainance of  privacy and the details of the complainants  bank account. Prayer for compensation  of Rs. 15,00,000/- and interest @ 15%  p.a. from the date of filing of this complaint beside  litigation cost of Rs. 50,000/- has been made.

The OP filed written statements/version after notice. All the allegations have been denying as leveled by the complainant. The complaint has been resisted stating that the cause of action arose at Jaipur  and as such this Forum lacks territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint. It is also stated that the complaint involves disputed and complex question of facts. Further, it is also stated that the complainant  was an employee of the OP for quite long time  and posted at Malviya Nagar, Jaipur at some point of time and as relieved from service on 21/09/2009. It is stated that  the complaint is unjust and baseless . In view of her small value  account balance  which was having an average balance of not more than 15,000/- as such the compensation and the interest are exaggerated and devoid of merit. Prayer to dismiss the complaint has been made.

Both the parties have filed their respective evidence by way of affidavit. Oral arguments are also addressed.

We have considered the material placed before us and the submissions made by the parties. As per the Code of Bank’s Commitment to Customers, the banks are required to keep confidential of the personal  information of the customers. Relevant portion of Clause 2.1.5 and 5 is reproduced below.

Clause 2.1.5

We will treat all your personal information as private and confidential subject to matters mentioned in Paragraph No. 5 below.

Clause 5

• We will treat all your personal information as private and confidential (even when you are no longer  a customer), and shall be guided by the following principles and policies.
• We will not reveal  information or data relating  to your accounts, whether provided  by you or otherwise , to anyone, including other companies / entities  in our group.
• If we are asked to give a banker’s reference about you, we will need  your written permission before we give it.

During the course of argument, the ld . Counsel for the OP stressed upon the jurisdiction and on the issue that complex question of facts and law are involved and as such the Civil Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate such complaint and not this Forum.

It is not in dispute that the complainant had her bank account  in the OP Bank at Barakhamba Road which falls under the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum  and as such the argument of the OP is rejected .

So far the issue of arguments regarding complex question of facts is concerned, we do not find any weightage in the arguments in the premise of admitted  position  of facts that the bank statement of the complainants bank account at Barakhamba Road, New Delhi  was issued by the OP bank  and the OP has not brought on record  the name of the branch with aforementioned  URL number. In other words, it is thus clear that  the bank statement  of the complainant’s account was printed and handed over to someone without the consent of the complainant as is evident from the record that the complainant’s husband has filed the said statement of the account before the M.M.  in the criminal case pending adjudication there. The bank account of the complaint is at Barakhamba Road, so this Forum has the territorial jurisdiction to deal the case.

We are, therefore, of the considered view that there is deficiency in service and also negligence on the part of OP by issuing the bank statement of complainant’s account without her consent. The claim of the complainant compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/-  is highly exaggerated and unjustifiable in the light of facts. We hold, the OP to be deficient in service and direct as under:-

1. OP to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant alongwith 9 % simple interest per annum from the date  of filing of this complaint i.e.   27/06/2017 till realization.
2. Litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/-.

The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of this order.

A copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost by post as per statutory requirement.

Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in.

File be consigned to record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 18/11/2019.      

                                                        

 

 

                                                             (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                                                    PRESIDENT

 

       (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                       (H M VYAS)

                  MEMBER                                                                                    MEMBER