Delhi

New Delhi

CC/129/2013

Jagdish Shah - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Sbi Cards & Payments Pvt.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

26 Oct 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/129/13                                 Dated:

 

In the matter of:

SHRI JAGDISH SHAH

S/O SHRI SITA  RAM

R/O 171/D4

BASANAT LAN RAILWAY COLONY

PAHARGNJ

NEW DELHI-110055.

         ……..COMPLAINANT

       

VERSUS

 

SBI CARDS & PAYMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.

SATATE BANK OF INDIA

LOCAL HEAD OFFIE

11, PARLIAMENT STREET

NEW DELHI-01

 

ALSO AT:-

DLF INFINITY TOWERS,

TOWER C, 10^TH-12^TH FLOOR, BLOCK-2,

BUILDING 3, DLF CYBER CITY,

GURGAON-122002 HARYAN

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

 

 

ORDER 

Member: Ritu Garodia

 

The complaint pertains to fraudulent transaction in credit card.

The brief facts are that two transaction was made through complainant’s credit care for Rs.39,109.71 and Rs.17,886.31 and intimation was send on 8:2 a.m. and 8:29 a.m.  respectively on 21.12.2012.  The complainant immediately blocked his card at 9.30 a.m., filled a dispute form and lodged a complaint in police station.  On 5.1.2013, IP details of location where card was used, was provided.  The transaction took place in France complainant paid Rs.80,361/- under protest on 31.8.2013.  The complainant alleges that transaction was made at 0032 hours and 0058 hours and information was given at 8:02 and 8:29 a.m. because of which card was blocked belatedly.

OP has defended itself on the ground that 3 D secure transactions used pass code generated via secure code comprising SBI Card numbers, date of birth, CVV number and Card expiry date.  OP further states that transaction occurred at 8:02:24 a.m. and 8:28:49 a.m.  was intimated on 8:02:41 a.m. and 8:29:00 a.m. respectively.

It can be inferred from pleadings of both parties that credit card in question was hacked and used by unscrupulous wrong doers.  OP has given immediate intimation.  The difference in time of transaction and intimation are due to time difference in France and India.  OP has assisted the complainant by providing IP address and other details.  Hence, no deficiency on part of OP is made out and complaint is dismissed.

File be consigned to record room.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost.

 

 

        Pronounced in open Court on 26.10.2015.

 

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

         

 

(RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER