This case has been filed U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the complainant that the complainant has two Savings Bank Accounts; one is at the opposite parties’ Chinsurah Branch, bearing no. 546010100120913 along with a Debit Card no. 4688055460018208 and another is at the opposite parties’ Konnagar Branch bearing no. 033010100573252 along with a Debit Card no. 4688050330548039. Suddenly it came to the knowledge of the complainant that from the statement of his Savings Bank Account at the opposite parties’ Konnagar Branch, bearing no. 033010100573252 an amount of Rs. 58,670/- only had been transferred to an unknown Account ‘ECOM PUR/Paytm Mobile/ Noida/…..’, in thirty one phases, on and from 30.7.2017 to 17.2.2018 which have been made illegally and fraudulently and also thereafter, again it came to the knowledge of the complainant that same type of money transfer had been made from his Savings Bank Account at the opposite parties’ Chinsurah Branch, bearing no. 546010100120913 showing an amount of Rs. 85,827/- only had been transferred to an unknown account ‘ECOM PUR/ Paytm Mobile/ Noida/…..’ in twenty three phases on and from 23.6.2017 to 10.10.2017 without even a any single instruction and/ or knowledge of the complainant and in this regard the complainant made complaint to the opposite parties’ bank, especially, to the opposite party no. 1 on 18.5.2018 in respect of Rs. 58,670/- centering around the said illegal activities of the opposite party no.1 and thereafter on 14.6.2018 complainant lodged a complaint with Chinsurah P.S. in this regard, which has been registered as G.D.E., being no. 836/18, dt. 14.6.2018 and its copy was also forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Chandannagar Police Commissionerate and it is also noted that the complainant made a complaint to the opposite party no. 1 on 5.3.2018 in respect of Rs. 85,827/- only centering around the said illegal activities of the opposite party no. 2 and thereafter on 18.3.2018 the complainant lodged a complaint with Chinsurah P.S. which has been registered as G.D.E. being no. 1432/18 dt. 18.3.2018 and its copy was also forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Chandannagar Police Commissionerate on the same date, i.e. 18.3.2018, totaling to Rs. 1,44,497/- only.
The complainant also states that in the meantime after receiving the complaint from the complainant the opposite parties’ bank credited the said amount of Rs. 85,827/- only in his Savings Bank Account being no. 033010100573252 in the same way as it had debited from his account, from one unknown account ‘ECOMPUR/Paytm Mobile/ Noida/…..’, marked as ‘lien’ and after sometime it had been back to the said unknown account without any rhyme and reason and till today the opposite parties’ bank have not replied and/or show the cause to the complainant for those types of abnormalities in the bank account, though in the meantime on 28.2.2018 as per the opposite parties’ advice complainant applied to the Axis Bank Ltd. (Mumbai) through Cardholder Dispute Form which was completely a furze.
The complainant also states that the complainant was bound to send the legal notice to the opposite party nos. 1 and 2 and its copy forwarded to the opposite party no. 3 along with 1) The Chairman, National Payments Corporation of India, Mumbai, 2) The Banking Ombudsmen, West Bengal & Sikkim, C/o. Reserve Bank of India, Kolkata, 3) The D.I.G., Cyber Crime, CID, Kolkata and 4) The Commissioner of Police, Chandannagar Police Commissionerate for their perusal and the same were duly served, as these matter of abnormalities in each and every aspect happened to those Bank Accounts wherein the complainant deposited his hard- earned money jointly with his spouse being operations as either or survivor, which the opposite parties’ bank grabbed from their Account in conspiracy with that person(s) who are handling that type of unknown account ‘ECOM PUR/ Paytm Mobile/Noida/….’, and/ or doing cyber crime.
The complainant also states that the cause of action arose on and from 23.6.2017 to 10.10.2017, 30.7.2017 to 17.2.2018, 28.2.2018, 18.3.2018, 18.5.2018 and 14.6.2018 and till it is continuing by the opposite parties and whereby the complainant is demanding to the opposite parties to cure the deficiencies in service agreed to be provided by the opposite parties especially, the opposite party no. 1 in connivance with the opposite party no. 2 which continues till date.
Complainant filed the complaint petition praying for direction upon the opposite parties for adjudication of malpractice of the opposite parties and to pay sum of Rs. 58,670/- and a sum of Rs. 85,827/- deposited in his savings bank accounts and to pay a sum of Rs. 1,44,497/- for the value of the services and to pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards compensation for the worries and anxieties and to pay the cost of the case.
The opposite parties contested the case by filing written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations as levelled against them. These opposite parties submit that the complainant has Savings Accounts with opposite party nos. 1 and 2 and in both the Accounts he was provided with ATM-cum-Debit Card and moreover, the phone number and email id of the complainant were also registered with both the Savings Bank Accounts and the transactions in the Account of the complainant maintained with opposite party no. 1 took place between June 2017 and October 2017 and the transactions in the Account of the complainant maintained with opposite party no. 2 took place between July 2017 and February 2018 but, the complainant had not spared a word on what was the reason for not contacting either of the two Branches ( opposite party nos. 1 or 2) at the first instance when he got the SMS in his registered mobile number about the alleged fraudulent transactions and the inaction on the part of the complainant only proves beyond any iota of doubt that the transactions were all genuine and all the transactions those took place in both the Accounts were authorised by him only and there is also not a single mention about the reason for coming to the Branch and talking about the alleged fraudulent transaction first time took place in the month of February 2018.
These opposite parties also state that after receiving the complaint from the complainant the opposite party Bank had provided a temporary credit of the same amount alleged to have been defrauded in the Accounts of the complainant and this process is followed all across the banking industry that pending any investigation of any fraudulent transaction the bank provides for a temporary credit and if after investigation it is found that there was no fault on the part of the bank then the same amount is taken back and during the period of investigation the amount so provided as temporary credit is marked as “lien” and which means that the account holder would not be able to use such fund till the investigation results are out and moreover, in parallel to their own investigation the opposite party Bank had also recommended the complainant to lodge the matter with the National payments Corporation of India who in turn had also confirmed that the alleged fraudulent transactions were all genuine and there is no question of any fraud.
These opposite parties also submit that the transactions that took place in the Accounts of the complainant were all “OTP” or “ONE TIME PASSWORD” based transactions and the transactions of transfer of funds from the Accounts of the complainant to the account/s as mentioned in the complaint petition were all effected through the Debit Card which are supposed to be in the exclusive possession of the complainant and whose PIN Number and card number should never be shared with anyone and upon effecting a transaction by entering the Card number, CVV Number, card holder’s name, the account holder gets an instant message of the OTP in his registered mobile phone number and in his registered email ID and such OTP is valid for only 5 minutes and beyond which that OTP becomes invalid and the complainant who was in possession of the Debit Card, the registered mobile number and registered email ID had himself affected the transactions or has compromised such details by allowing anyone known to him to use such confidential details with his knowledge and consent and after approaching the opposite party Bank Branch the complainant had confined in one of the staff of the Branch that he had suspicion on one of his very close relative about misusing the OTP’s and fraudulently effecting the transactions as that relative had access to his email ID and password and the dealing office of the opposite party Bank advised the complainant to lodge a police complaint about that issue.
The opposite parties also state that complainant should be sufficiently penalized for filing such a false, frivolous and vexations case against the opposite parties. Thus, opposite parties have prayed for dismissal of the instant case.
Points for consideration
- Whether the complainant is the consumer of the opposite parties or not?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the opposite parties did unfair trade practice?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief, if any?
DECISIONS WITH REASONS
Point no. 1
From the materials on record, it transpires that the complainant is a Consumer to the opposite parties as provided by the spirit of Section 2 (1) (d) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Point no. 2
Complainant and the opposite parties are resident/having their office address within the district of Hooghly. The complaint value within Rs. 20,00,000/- i.e. limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
Point nos. 3, 4 and 5:
All these points are taken up conjointly as those are related to each other for convenience and brevity of discussion.
First of all, it may be noted that in support of his case complainant filed evidence in chief wherein he more-or-less has highlighted a replica of the contents of his complaint. That apart, complainant furnished photocopy of legal notice dt. 23.8.2018 issued by his ld. Advocate addressing to the two concerned branch managers of Axis Bank ltd. Photocopies of postal receipts of the same have also been furnished. And copy of said legal notice has been sent to (1) Managing Director, Axis bank Ltd., (2) The Chairman, National Payments Corporation of India, (3) The Banking Ombudsmen, West Bengtal and Sikkim, (4) DIG, Cyber Crime, C.I.D., West Bengal and (5) Commissioner of Police, Chandanangore Police Commissionerate. Photocopies of AD Cards, Track consignment report.
Complainant also filed a photocopy of complaint to the Chinsurah P.S. dt. 5.3.2018 along with a copy of card holder dispute form dt. 20.2.2018 including copies of statement of accounts and bank passbook of complainant.
Complainant also filed a photocopy of complaint at Chinsurah P.S. dt. 21.5.2018 along with a copy of complaint dt. 16.5.2018 to the Axis Bank, Konnagar Branch and photocopies of the reply dt. 18.5.2018 from the end of Axis Bank including photocopies of bank statement of Axis bank.
On the other hand, opposite parties have also filed affidavit in chief along with photocopies of different documents to counter the case of complainant.
Further, it may be noted that complainant filed BNA. Similarly, opposite parties have also filed BNA.
Now, in view of the above discussion and on perusal of the contents of complaint, evidence in chief including different copies of documents from the end of the complainant and also the BNA of complainant it clearly indicates that complainant mainly attacked upon the opposite parties with allegations that the opposite parties who have conjointly, deliberately and intentionally have done illegal activities using an unknown Account ‘ECOM PUR/ Paytm Mobile/Noida/….’ by which complainant has suffered a huge financial loss in spite of being the consumer of opposite parties after depositing/ investing his hard-earned money with his spouse.
On contrary, going through the contents of written version of opposite parties including their evidence in chief coupled with photocopies of documents in support of their case and BNA on their behalf it clearly depicts that opposite parties have clearly tried to establish that complainant has put forth a complete false and fabricated case. The statements made by the complainant are all a blatant lie with no substance or evidence. The action of the complainant is an outcome of an afterthought and present case is a motivated case filed by complainant with an intention to extort money from opposite party Bank Ltd.
Regard being had upon the submissions of ld. Counsel appearing for the respective parties and going through the materials on record first of all, it is pertinent to note that it is an admitted position that in connection with two savings bank accounts of complainant, one with Chinsurah Branch, Axis bank ltd. being S/B Account no. 546010100120913 and other with Konnagar Branch Axis Bank ltd. being S/B Account no. 033010100573252 a total sum of Rs. 1,44,497/- (Rs. 58,670/- from Konnagar Branch in 31 phases on and from 30.7.2017 to 17.2.2018 and a sum of Rs. 85,827/- from Chinsurah Branch in 23 phases on and from 23.6.2017 to 10.10.2017) have been transferred to an unknown Account ‘ECOM PUR/ Paytm Mobile/Noida/….’ and over this issue it is complainant who stated that an amount of Rs. 85,827/- only in his savings bank account no. 033010100573252 has been credited by the opposite parties marked as “lien” and in the same way, the said amount had been debited from the said account without any rhyme and reason. Complainant clearly stated that opposite parties’ Bank is directly involved with the illegal transfer of money from the complainant savings bank accounts without his consent and as per complainant it is one type of cyber crime.
Complainant in his evidence also mentioned that he lodged a complaint with opposite party no. 1, Branch Manager Axis Bank Chinsurah Branch on 18.5.2018 for Rs. 58,670/- and thereafter complainant lodged a complaint with Chinsurah P.S. being G.D.E. no. 836/2018 dt. 14.6.2018 and its copy was also forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Chandannagore Police Commissionerate. Further complainant has stated in his evidence that he made a complaint to the opposite party no. 1 Chinsurah Branch on 5.3.2018 for Rs. 85,827/- centering around that illegal activities of opposite party no. 2’s Konnagar Branch and thereafter on 18.3.2018 complainant lodged a complaint with Chinsurah P.S. being G.D.E. no. 1432/2018 dt. 18.3.2018 and its copy has been forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Chandannagore Police Commissionerate on the same date i.e. 18.3.2018.
The opposite parties in their evidence have narrated specifically that complainant had saving Accounts with opposite party nos. 1 and 2 and in both the Accounts complainant was provided with ATM-cum- Debit Card. Moreover the phone number and E-mail id of the complainant were also registered with both the saving bank accounts of complainant and thus, the contention of the complainant that he was unaware of multiple transactions taking place in his both accounts is false and devoid of any truth.
Considering the materials on record it is to be noted that the disputed transactions in the S/B account of the complainant maintained with opposite party no. 1 (Chinsurah branch) took place between 23.6.2017 and 10.10.2017 as per complainant and the disputed transactions in the S/B account of the complainant maintained with the opposite party no. 2 (Konnagar Branch) took place on and from 30.7.2017 to 17.2.2018 but, it is totally astonishing that nowhere of the petition of complaint complainant spared a single word to the effect that for what reason complainant did not contact the two branches (opposite parties nos. 1 and 2) at the first instance when complainant got the SMS in his registered mobile no. about the alleged fraudulent transactions. Obviously, inaction/ non action on the part of complainant only indicates beyond all reasonable doubt that alleged fraudulent transactions were all genuine and all those transactions took place in both the S/B accounts were authenticated by the complainant. In this regard ld. Counsel appearing for the opposite parties candidly argued that there is also not a single mention on the part of complaint about the reason for coming to the branch and talking about the alleged fraudulent transactions first time in the month of February 2018. No doubt this Forum finds force and sprit in such submission.
Ld. Counsel appearing for the opposite parties also submitted that the opposite party after receiving complaint from the complainant had provided a temporary credit of the amount of Rs. 85,827/- alleged to have been defrauded in the concerned accounts of complainant and this process is followed all across the banking industry that pending any investigation of any fraudulent transaction/s the bank provides for a temporary credit and if after investigation it is found that there was no fault on the part of bank then the same amount is taken back and during the period of investigation the amount so provided as temporary credited is marked as “lien” and which means that the account holder would not be able to use such fund till the results of investigation are out. Ld. Counsel for the opposite parties also submitted that the opposite party bank had also recommended the complainant to lodged the matter with National Payments Corporation of India and complainant also lodged complaint accordingly with National Payments Corporation of India who in turn had also confirmed that the alleged fraudulent transactions were all genuine and there is no question of any fraud. In this regard ld. Counsel appearing for the complainant has failed to make any convincing submission. Moreover, he has also failed to make any positive submission on behalf of the complainant on other aspects also. Resulting which it can be said that in fact, complaint case is weak and feeble. Further it may be noted that mere allegation is not a proof and the allegation should be proved beyond all reasonable doubt and on that score complainant has failed to do the same totally.
In view of the above discussion and considering the attending facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the view that complainant case has no leg to stand upon and thus, is liable to be dismissed.
Hence,
it is,
ordered
that the instant case be and the same is dismissed on contest.
There will be no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/ their ld. Advocates on record by hand with proper acknowledgment/ send by ordinary course for information and necessary action.
