This revisional application arises against the interim order passed by Ld. DCDRC, Uttar Dinajpur dated 07.10.2021 and 31.08.2021 in CC No. 37/2021.

The fact of the case in nutshell is that one Sri Suman Mandal, a customer of S.B.I , Balurghat branch having a cash credit and SB A/C in the  said branch filed the instant consumer complaint against SBI, Balurghat branch to the effect that  on 08.04.2021 the complainant received a message and phone call from mobile No. 09384053964, claiming to be the bank authority, stating to upgrade his KYC, as if his KYC is not upgraded, otherwise his mobile No. 9614619088 would be blocked within 24 hours. He also instructed the complainant to download one Anydesk App. The complainant in good faith downloaded the Anydesk App and followed the instruction unknowingly and transferred Rs. 10/- to his another BSNL No. 9434603983 and at a much later date, took the bank statement where details of debit column were shown to debit Rs.10/- and WDL TFR INB RCUBE PLANET PRI 4599567162090 AT 99922 INTERNET BA. Before understanding anything, the complainant was surprised to find that amount of Rs. 499800/- and Rs. 499900/ were withdrawn subsequently without his permission and consent in any form, from his Cash Credit Bank Account by two internet transferors on the date 08.04.2021 by way of WDL TFR INB RAZORPAY SET PVT. 4599296162096 AT 999222 INTERNET BA on 08.04.2021.

On the same, date immediately after the incident, the complainant informed the same to the bank and approached to block the said A/C No. 32093876118 till recovery of Rs. 999700/- but the bank authority did not pay any heed to his prayer and deducted interest day by day on 30.09.2021, 31.05.2021, 30.06.2021 and 31.07.2021 on the said Cash Credit Account.

So, the complainant filed the instant case and prayed before the district commission for an interim order so that till recovery of his lost amount, bank should be debarred from deducting any interest.

Ld. Dist Commission vide Order At 31.08.2021 passed the interion order by which SBI Balurghat branch was debarred from deducting interest upon the amount Rs. 9,99,700/- from each credit A/C No. 32093876118 of the complainant till 30.09.2021. The bank (OP No.1) after receiving copy of notice appeared before the Dist. Commission and filed petition for revisionist of the order dated 31.08.2021 and to rescind the same which was heard and rejected by the Ld. District commission on 07.10.2021 and the interim order date 31.08.2021 was made absolute till the disposal of the case.

The said two orders dated 31.08.2021 and 07.10.2021 are challenged in Revision and the complainant has contested the revision through Ld. Advocate.

Mr. R. Tripathy conducted the hearing of Revision on behalf of Revisionist. White Mr. Bhowmik Ld. Advocate appears and conducts the hearing on behalf of complainant (OP of Revision).

                                                         Decision with reasons

 Ld. Advocate of Revisionist mentions that It is admitted that the Opposite Party/ Complainant on 08.04.2021 received a message and phone call from an unknown number claiming bank authority for up gradation of his KYC and he was instructed to download one "ANYDESK APP application. The Complainant/ Opposite Party without verifying the number and phone call downloaded the application.

The bank statement of the Opposite Party shows that the money was transferred to WDL TFR INB RCUBE PLANET PRI 4599567162090 AT 99922 INTERNAET BA. Admittedly the Opposite Party/ Complainant found out that amount of Rs. 4,99,800/- & Rs. 4,99,900/- only were withdrawn from his Cash Credit loan account on 08.04.2021 by two online transactions, which the Opposite Party/ Complainant alleges to have not done himself and is fraudulently transferred/ withdrawn.

Admittedly the alleged loss suffered by the Opposite Party/Complainant is due to a fraudulent activity by an unknown miscreant, which needs to be informed to the Cyber Crime Department or any other appropriate department of the Police station having jurisdiction. As alleged, some unknown miscreant is liable for the loss of the Opposite Party/ Complainant, and such unknown miscreant can only be traced by an investigating agency like police and be brought within the clutches of  law for punishment as per the law of the land.

The Revisionist is not liable for the APP installed by the Opposite Party/ Complainant and the act done by the unknown miscreant. If in case the Revisionist would have restricted the command of the consumer (Opposite Party/ Complainant), that would have amounted to deficiency of service. The Opposite Party/ Complainant is responsible for the act done by the unknown miscreant.

For that the interest is deducted by the amount centrally and operated by the server, the Branch has neither the authority nor can intervene manually to stop the deduction of interest, and Revisionists are a Nationalized Bank and Nationalized Bank's Officer dealing with public money. No special provision can be made for an individual, which may jeopardize the entire banking operation affecting the interest of the public at large. If there is genuinely in the claim of the Opposite Party/ Complainant then the miscreant will compensate for the wrong done fraudulently.

Ld. Advocate of OP in Revision countered the arguments of the revisionist and contended on 08/04/2021, immediately after the incident, the complainant contacted and informed the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Balurghat Branch and reported the matter to the Bank with a written complaint and with another written complaint to the Cyber Crime Police a Station, Dakshin Dinajpur at Balurghat. But Police after enquiry registered FIR on 25/05/2021, treating the GD entry no 165 as FIR, which was deposited duly sealed and signed on 08/04/2021 by the Cyber Crime Police Station. Dakshin Dinajpur.

The complainant again on 12/04/2021 deposited one prayer for recovery of the money fraudulently withdrawn and not deducting any interest on his cash credit account no 32093876118 till recovery of Rs.9,99,700/-which was fraudulently withdrawn. The Bank committed deficiency in service by not depositing the amounts and restoring the position in the cash credit Bank account and the bank sending money by internet transfers when informed promptly by the consumer in such case is expected to lodge the complaint immediately with the police and ought to follow the money went in to wrong hands by appropriate criminal proceedings. In the meantime, the Bank concerned shall make enquiry of money loss caused to the Consumer by negligence on the part of the Bank or its officials. The Non-deposit and non-restoration of the money misused and or misappropriated or wrongly sent by internet transfers, at the foot of the CC Bank account of the Complainant amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the Revisionist 1/ OP No.1 Bank in collusion with O.P. No. 2 to O.P. No. 8, actionable by the consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the Consumer Protection Act. 2019.

The complainant again on 09/06/2021, deposited one prayer for recovery of the money fraudulently withdrawn and not deducting any interest on his cash credit account no 32093876118 till recovery of Rs.9,99,700/- which was fraudulently withdrawn. The Bank in spite of reminder committed deficiency in service by not depositing the amounts and restoring the position in the cash credit Bank account rather the bank was charging day by day the interest on the money fraudulently withdrawn in spite of repeated reminder.

After hearing both sides, some technical lapses on the part of the Ld. District Commission are reflected in the impugned orders challenged in revision.

Firstly, after registration of the instant Consumer Complaint, the matter was placed for it’s admission on 31/08/2021.

Ld. Commission through over sight has not admitted the Consumer Complaint while an interim order was passed on that day which to be subsisted till 30/09/2021. The order does not stands on its legacy as before without admission of Consumer Complaint. No interim order could be passed.

Rather Vide order  dated 07/10/2021 Ld. District Commission has made the interim order dated 31/08/2021 absolute which to be effected till the disposal of the Consumer Complaint while in view of Consumer rules and regulation no interim order could be subsisted after elapse of 45 days from the date of passing interim order.

So the order dated 31/08/2021 and 07/10/2021 has already lost its legal value after expiry of 45 days.

The said order Ld. District Commission has already lost the legal impact.

So, the revisionists has some merits in the revisional application.

Hence, it is ordered

That the instant revisional application is allowed on contest without cost.

The impugned order dated 31/08/2021 and 07/10/2021 passed by the Ld. DCDRC, Uttar Dinajpur in CC No. 37/2021 stand set aside.

Ld. District Commission is asked to dispose of the instant Consumer Case on its merit after removing the technical irregularities. Any interim order passed by this bench stands withdrawn. Parties of the case are asked to appear before the Ld. District Commission on next date already fixed.

Let the order be communicated to the Ld. District Commission.