Passed by Shri  Atul  D. Alsi, Hon’ble President.

1. The complainant is retired from Military Nursing Services having Saving account, PPF account, Over Draft account , Fix Deposit with opposite bank. The complainant is pensioner and operating saving bank accounts bearing no.10961714021 alongwith other account with opposite party bank.   The complainant normally executing withdrawal through her ATM card and rarely visiting the opposite party bank in person and average daily transaction amount would be between 10,000/- to 15,000/- and average monthly transaction would be about 1,00,000/- that within a short period of 24 days from 29.7.2019 to 21.7.2019 there were abnormal transaction, advances overdrafts from complainant various accounts held with opposite party bank account amounted to Rs.41,70,000/-.The complainant failed victim to online fraud and thereby transferred huge amount of Rs,41,70,000/- within a span of 24 days from respondent bank. All these transfers were made by submitting RTGS application to opposite party bank with yourself cheque for payment of transfer.  The complainant has filed criminal complaint with police and thereby FIR came to be registered under cyber crime.  The opposite party bank has failed to detect the suspicious transactions. The failure of opposite party bank to follow mandate guidelines.  The RBI circular for customer protection for limiting liability of customers in unauthorised electronic banking transactions mandate that the systems and procedures in the bank must be designed to make customer fill safe about carrying electronic banking transaction and for that bank must provide appropriate system for prevention of fraud and the opposite party bank fails to provide dynamic fraud detention and prevention mechanism is leading to happing fraud.  Therefore the opposite party bank is responsible to pay monitory relief to the complainant. Therefore present complaint is filed before this commission to direct the opposite party bank to pay Rs.41,70,000/- along with relief for mental torture and litigation charges amounted to Rs.5,60,000/-. The complaint is relying on the RBI circular for limited liability of customers in online electronic transaction dated 6.7.2017.
2. The notice has been served to opposite party but opposite party failed to appear before the commission therefore case proceeded exparte against opposite party on dated 04.01.2022.
3582407835169.  

3. The complainant file FIR on 15.9.2020 at police station, Gittikhadan, District-Nagpur u/s.419,420,468 of IPC along with 66 D of Information and Technology  Act 2008,vide crime 0554 of 2020. The amount from various accounts of complainant have been withdrawn by RTGS facility by drawing cheque in favour of opposite party Bank.  After filing of complaint with opposite party bank, The opposite party bank has taken cognizance of complaint as per provision of law. The complaint case does not come under unauthorised withdrawal of money by using ATM card or online fraud. Therefore the judgement filed of Kerala High Court in RSA 1087/2018 in State bank of India Vs. V. George is not application to the present case.  The circular filed of RBI dated 6.7.2017 for the purpose of limit of liability is applicable in case of fraud in electronic banking transaction. Therefore that circular is not applicable to the present case in hand. For withdrawal of Rs.41,70,000/- by RTGS through issuing cheque with the signature of complainant the opposite party bank is not liable and responsible. Therefore the complainant has no merit in the present case. Therefore complaint is liable to be dismissed. Hence the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
3. Copy of this order to be given to all the parties free of cost.