West Bengal

Bankura

CC/29/2023

Subhabrata Pati - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Signatory Authority Phonepe Private Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Goutam Kumar Ghosh

28 Nov 2023

ORDER

IN    THE   DISTRICT   CONSUMER   DISPUTES   REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANKURA

  Consumer Complaint No. 29/2023

          Date of Filing: 30/03/2023

Before:                                        

1. Samiran Dutta                            Ld. President.      

2. Siddhartha Sankar Bhui            Ld. Member.                            

 

For the Complainant:  Ld. Advocate Ankita Ghosh

For the O.P.: Ld. Advocate Arindam Ghosh

 

Complainant 

Subhabrata Pati, S/o Prabin Kumar Pati, at Katjuridanga, Uttarayan 4, Bankura- 722 102

 

Opposite Party

The Signatory Authority Phonepe Private Ltd., having Registered office at Unit 001, Ground Floor, Boston House, Suren Road, Off. Andheri-Kurla Rd., Andheri (East), Mumbai- 400 093

                                                                                                                                                                  

 

FINAL ORDER / JUDGEMENT

 

Order No.07

Dated:28-11-2023

Both parties file hazira through advocate.

The case is fixed for argument.

After hearing argument from both sides the Commission proceeds to dispose of the case as hereunder: -

The Complainant’s case is that his Mobile No. 9475336762 is linked to Phone Pay and in course of transaction the O.P. Phonepay Authority all on a sudden blocked the Phone pay Wallet citing security reasons and thereby the Complainant is yet to get refund of Rs.7,916/- standing in the Phonepay Wallet deposit. The Complainant has served a legal notice dt.10/09/2022 seeking relief from the O.P. Authority but in vain. The Complainant has therefore approached this Commission for appropriate relief.

O.P./Phonepay Authority contested the case by filing a written version in details that they have the right and authority to block any such Phonepay wallet in case unusual transaction is detected. The O.P. /PhonepayAuthority has blocked the phonepay wallet of the Complainant accordingly and so the Complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case..

                                                                                                                                                                                 Contd……p/2

                                                                                                     Page: 2

.                                                                                   -: Decision with reasons: -

Having regard to the facts of the case, submission, contention and documents on both sides the Commission finds that there is clear terms and condition between the Complainant / Consumer and the O.P./Phonepay Authority whereby the O.P./Phonepay Authority is empowered to block the phonepay wallet on security reasons. O.P./Phonepay Authority has furnished before this Commission in detail the transactions through e-phone wallet of the Complainant which shows that the transactions are doubtful requiring further investigation and verification and accordingly by Reply notice dated: 14/10/2022 the Complainant was directed to furnish the credit statement for the credit card of the Complainant and the front page of the Pass Book of the Complainant’s relevant Bank Account but the Complainant failed to furnish the same. It has been specifically informed to the Complainant from O.P./Phonepay Authority via e-mail message that the O.P./Phonepay A/c of the Complainant has been blocked due to security reasons and the A/c reinstatement decision will be taken by the concerned team after required validation.

When the phonepay wallet of the Complainant is under scanner by the competent authority this Commission has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the instant case at this stage as it is likely to affect the enquiry process which is not desirable and permissible under the law.

It is however made clear that after validation of the phonepay wallet of the Complainant in due process of law the O.P./Phonepay Authority will be bound to pay to the Complainant the deposit of Rs.7,916/- as prayed for and till then no order / direction can be passed by this Commission. In other wards it can be said that the case is premature and the Complainant has to wait for final decision of the  O.P./Phonepay Authority.

Accordingly the case is disposed of on contest with the direction upon the O.P./Phonepay Authority to expedite the validation process of the phonepay wallet of the Complainant with full and active co-operation of the Complainant. O.P./Phonepay Authority should complete the entire exercise within three months from this date failing which the law will take its own course.

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

 ____________________                _________________         

HON’BLE   PRESIDENT          HON’BLE MEMBER