West Bengal

Bankura

RA/5/2023

The Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sri Sanjib Barat - Opp.Party(s)

Krishnendu Lohar

19 Apr 2024

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION BANKURA

Review Application No. 05/2023

Arising out of C. C. No. 52/2023

                                                Date of Filing: 22/12/2023                                          

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                            Ld. President.      

2. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member. 

 

For the Petitioner:  Ld. Advocate Krishnendu Lohar

For the Respondent/O.P.No.1:  Ld. Advocate Subrata Kumar Chakraborty

For the Respondent/O.P.No.2:  Ld. Advocate Siddhartha Sankar Adhvaryyu

 

Petitioner

Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Maliara Branch, Village & P.O.Maliara, P.S.Barjora, Dist. Bankura, PIN-722 142, Mob.8250157634

Respondent O.P. (s)

1.Sanjib Barat, S/O Lt. Sristidhar Barat, R/O Vill & P.O.Maliara, P.S.Barjora, Dist. Bankura, PIN- 722 142, Mob.9635601880                                                                                        

2.The Branch Manager, Bandhan Bank, Katihar Branch, Durgasthan Chawk, P.O.Katihar, Bihar, PIN-854 105                                                                                          

3.Chanchal Kumar Sah, S/O Naresh Prasad Sah, Near Fertilizer Centre, Gumitala, Ward No.28, Katihar, Bihar, PIN- 854 105 

4.R.J. Traders, Raniganj, P.O. & P.S.Raniganj, Dist.  Paschim Bardhaman, W.B.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT

Order No.05

Dated: 19-04-2024

This is an application u/s 40 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 for review of the impugned Order/Judgement dated: 30/11/2023 passed by this Commission in C.C. No.52 of 2023.

Both parties are present and placed their respective submission. The ground of review is mainly two fold - (1) The Petitioner / PNB Bank could not get the opportunity to contest the case by filing any written version. (2) As per Reserve Bank of India guideline they have no liability in the transaction in question. Be it mentioned here that those two points have been raised by the Petitioner / PNB Bank in this Review case in the form of written version. Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Sanjib Barat has vehemently contended before the Commission that the instant Review application is not maintainable as there is no error apparent on the face of the record. His further contention is that the Petitioner/PNB Bank is fully negligent of effecting the transaction in question without proper verification as a result of which his client has suffered pecuniary loss.

                                                                                                                                                                                          Contd…..p/2

Page: 2

Before going into the merit of the case it is necessary to state relevant facts of the case. O.P./Sanjib Barat in order to make fund transfer of Rs.3.5 Lakh to the A/c of O.P. No.4/R.G. Traders, Bandhan Bank, Raniganj placed a Cheque drawn on Petitioner/PNB Bank to the same effect before Petitioner/PNB Bank on 01/10/2022 and filled up requisite form wherein he inadvertently put the A/c Number of the Beneficiary as 10170005103522 in place of correct A/c Number-10170005103502 belonging to O.P. No.4/R.G. Traders, Bandhan Bank, Raniganj and the Petitioner/PNB Bank without verification of the Beneficiary Account Holder transferred the said amount to the wrong Account Number belonging to O.P. No.3/Chanchal Kumar Sah of Bandhan Bank/Katihar, Bihar who admitted to have received the amount but did not part with the same. The Account of O.P. No.3 has been withheld by O.P. 2 Bandhan Bank on the initiative taken by Petitioner/PNB Bank. O.P./Sanjib Barat thereafter approached the Petitioner/PNB Bank for refund of the wrongly sent amount but of no effect and hence the aforesaid complaint the case No. being 52/2023 was filed before this Commission where though O.P 2/Bandhan Bank, Katihar Branch contested the case by filing a written version but the Petitioner/PNB Bank despite getting sufficient opportunity did not prefer to contest the case by filing any written version.

After consideration of all the facts and materials on record the Commission was pleased to fix the liability of the Petitioner/PNB, Bank to the tune of Rs.3.5 Lakh payable to the O.P./Sanjib Barat.

Without complying the aforesaid order Petitioner/PNB Bank has further approached this Commission by way of  Review application on the ground stated therein.

It is well settled that scope of review is very limited. The District Commission can only review its own order if there is any error detected on the face of the record. In this case non-submission of W.V. and non-citation of RBI guideline at the time of hearing of the aforesaid complaint case as contended by Petitioner/PNB Bank cannot be considered as an apparent error on the face of the record as they got sufficient opportunity to contest the case by submission of W.V. and citation of relevant RBI guideline. This apart the Commission finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order under consideration.

However, Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner/PNB Bank has referred to Clause-3.3 of Circular No.34/2017, dt.21/08/2017 issued by the General Manager/PNB Bank to justify his contention that the Petitioner/Bank has no liability even if the amount is wrongly/mistakenly sent to the wrong A/c Number as it is the fault of the O.P./Sanjib Barat who put the wrong A/c Number in RTGS form. For proper understanding of this contention let us reproduce relevant Clause-3.3 of the said Circular as follows: -

                                                                                                                                                                                  Contd….p/3

Page:3

“Credit under customer transactions received by the RTGS member in its settlement Account through the RTGS system has to be ultimately credited to the Account of the beneficiary customer at the concerned branch of the beneficiary bank on the basis of the A/c Number of the beneficiary customer after due verification thereof. In case of discrepancy observed in respect of the name of the beneficiary customer credit should be effected on the basis of the A/c Number after due verification thereof.”  (Underline is given by the Commission for the purpose of emphasis)

It is therefore clear from the above Circular that the name of the beneficiary customer should also be verified while effecting fund transfer through RTGS system. But in this case no verification has been carried out by the Remitting Bank/Petitioner PNB Bank with regard to the name of the beneficiary customer.

Ld. Advocate for the Petitioner/PNB Bank has also relied on RBI’s Circular dated: 14/10/2010 Clause-5 whereof says that “destination bank may afford credit to the beneficiary’s Account based on the A/c Number as furnished by Remitter/Originating Bank in the message/data file. The beneficiary’s name details may be used for verification based on risk perception, value on transfer, nature of transaction, post credit checking etc. This Clause though not applicable to the present case but it is in line with the above Circular over emphasizing the importance of verification of the  name of beneficiary customer together with his Account number at the time of fund transfer through RTGS system.

Thus the Petitioner/PNB Bank cannot in any way avoid their bounden duty to verify the name of the beneficiary customer at the time of effecting the transaction in question. It is within the knowledge of the Petitioner/PNB Bank to detect the mismatch of the name of the beneficiary customer but unfortunately Petitioner/PNB Bank has failed to discharge their duty by taking due care and caution while effecting the transaction in question. It would have been easier for the Petitioner/PNB Bank to detect the mistake in the transaction has the matter been brought to the notice of the Petitioner/PNB Bank by O.P.1/Sanjib Barat at the earliest opportunity but this time factor will not absolve the Petitioner/PNB Bank of their liability to compensate the affected customer as it is a human error of the customer for which he should not be victimized.

At the time of hearing the Branch Manager, PNB was present to assist the conducting Lawyer and his candid submission before the Commission was that this is an unfortunate incident for which they expressed their helplessness without attributing any sorts of negligence and deficiency in service on their part.

                                                                                                                                                                                      Contd……p/4

Page: 4

Considering the real perspective of the transaction and the inadvertent mistake of the Remitting customer both the Originating bank and the Destination bank i.e. Petitioner/ PNB  Bank and O.P.2/ Bandhan Bank, Katihar Branch, Bihar should come forward jointly  within the framework of the Banking rules to realize the wrongly sent amount of Rs.3.5 Lakh from O.P. No.3/Chanchal Kumar Sah initially by reverse remittance of Rs.99,652.97 already standing at the credit of O.P. No.3 account as withheld to the Originating Account holder i.e. O.P. No.1/ Sanjib Barat and proper steps should be taken by both Petitioner/ PNB Bank and O.P.2/Bandhan Bank, Katihar, Bihar jointly and severally for realization of the balance amount i.e. Rs.2,50,347.43 (Rs.3,50,000.00  minus Rs. 99,652.97) from O.P. No.3/Chanchal Kumar Sah and remitting the same to the Account of the O.P./Sanjib Barat.

By taking holistic approach for resolution of the dispute between the parties the Commission hereby disposes  the Review application with the direction here-in-below:-

(1)Petitioner /PNB Bank and O.P.2/Bandhan Bank, Katihar, Bihar are jointly and severally directed to remit Rs.99,652.97 by reverse process from the withheld account of O.P. No.3/Chanchal Kumar Sah to the Account of O.P. No.1/Sanjib Barat within a fortnight from this date without waiting for recovery of the entire amount.

(2)Petitioner /PNB Bank and O.P.2/Bandhan Bank, Katihar, Bihar are jointly and severally directed to realize Rs.2,50,347.43 (Rs.3,50,000.00  minus Rs. 99,652.97) from the A/c of  O.P. No.3/Chanchal Kumar Sah in consultation with RBI and remit to the Account of O.P. No.1/Sanjib Barat within two months from this date.

(3)However in the event of failure of realization of the balance amount as directed above within the stipulated period Petitioner/PNB Bank will have to pay to the O.P.1/Sanjib Barat the balance amount of Rs. 2,50,347.43 within one month thereafter in default law will take its own course.

The impugned order under Review is accordingly modified.

The Review application thus stands disposed of.

Both parties be supplied copy of this order free of cost.

 

   ____________________                 _________________         

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT              HON’BLE MEMBER