ORAL

Axis Bank Limited Vs Shishu Pal

10-07-2023

                   BY MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR, PRESIDENT

                                                 ORDER

Heard Sri Amit Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Mohit Rastogi, learned Counsel for the respondent.

This appeal has been preferred by opposite party of complaint case no. 113/2021; Shishu Pal Vs Authorized Representative of Axis Bank against the judgment and order dated 01-04-2022 passed by Learned District Consumer Commission First, Bareilly. 

The brief facts of the appeal are that, the impugned judgment and order passed by the Learned District Consumer Commission is ex-parte and without application of mind as there was no deficiency in service on behalf of the appellant bank. The respondent/complainant Shishu Pal was having a salary saving bank account no. 916010056848888 in the appellant bank. On 25-07-2020 the respondent/complainant tried to withdraw an amount of Rs. 2000/- through ATM but the same amount was stuck in ATM Machine. The respondent/complainant claimed to inform the incident to the appellant bank without any delay. The respondent/complainant had claimed in the complaint that he received a phone call from unknown mobile no. 9144997277 on 25/07/2022, who called himself an officer of Axis Bank and by taking complainant in confidence, unknown person asked personal details of the complainant which includes ATM No. and ATM Pin Code as well as OTP Number from the complainant which complainant provided to the unknown person.

-2-

It is submitted that the complainant himself gives his personal details while banks don’t ask anyone to share their details over a phone call. The respondent/complainant himself applied for a personal loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- having Loan Agreement No. 12545662/ PPR020505302190 on using Customer ID 847950524 from the savings bank of the complainant through Axis Bank  mobile application by online mode. In respect of the Personal Loan Application, Loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- was sanctioned in the name of Respondent/Complainant of which amount of Rs. 4,90,640/- was credited in his account on 27-07-2020. On 27-07-2020 when the respondent/complainant came to the Bank and told about the credited amount, the Bank staff requested the respondent/ complainant to give a cheque to the Bank for repayment, if he has not required the loan. The respondent/complainant again visited to the bank at 3:31 P.M. to inform about funds debited from his account. The funds were transferred through IMPS/Paytm/UPI from the respondent/complainant’s loan account to several different accounts.

It is also stated that the details of the Bank Account, ATM Card, Pin Number and other secret information and it is the sole duty of the respondent/complainant to keep his confidential data safe so that it cannot be misused. The appellant is not liable for any loss or damage, if arising from negligence of the respondent/complainant. It is submitted that the Learned District Consumer Commission failed to understand the facts of the respondent/complainant’s complaint and also failed to appreciate the facts that the appellants are nowhere deficiency in service. The Learned District Consumer Commission does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter, which specifically comes under the jurisdiction of criminal law, therefore the impugned judgment

-3- 

and order, which is perverse, contrary to law and deserves to be quashed. Counsel for the appellant Bank therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Commission may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned judgment and order and to allow the appeal.

I have perused the impugned judgment and order and gone through the pleadings, evidence and arguments available on record.

The Learned District Consumer Commission while passing the impugned judgment and order very carefully observed that the appellants’ bank played fraud against the respondent/complainant. The respondent/complainant filed his account statement before the Learned District Consumer Commission which shows that on 24-07-2020, Rs. 2000/- has been withdrawn and on 27-07-2020 Rs. 4,90,640/- has been credited in the account of the respondent/complainant and on the very same day i.e. on 27-07-2020 through 05 transactions Rs. 2,00,017.00, Rs. 30,004.00, Rs. 2,00,017.00, Rs. 35,005.00 and Rs. 25,905/- have been debited from the aforesaid account. If a person who get Rs. 4,90,640.00 as a loan amount will not return on the same day therefore it seems that some forgery has been created by the staff/employee/ personal of the appellants’ bank.  It is clearly a case of fishing and that too with the collusion of the Bank employees.   

The Learned District Consumer Commission, after considering all aspect of the case passed the impugned judgment and order which needs no interference by this Court.

The appeal is liable to be dismissed with costs.

Accordingly the appeal is dismissed with cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

-4- 

The impugned judgment and order passed by the Learned District Consumer Commission is hereby confirmed.

Let copy of this order be made available to the parties as per rules.

If any amount deposited by appellant in appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 shall be remitted to District Consumer Commission First, Bareilly     alongwith interest accrued for disposal in accordance with this judgment.

The Stenographer is requested to upload this order on the website of this Commission at the earliest.

                                          (JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR)                                                                                           

                                            PRESIDENT        

         Ashish

           Court No.1