Date of Filing:17.11.2022

Date of Disposal:29.05.2023

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION BENGALURU

1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.

ORDER

SRI RAMACHANDRA.M.S,PRESIDENT

1. The complainants files a complaint with this Commission under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 for deficiency of service and such other reliefs.

2.  The following are the complaint's key facts:

This is case of the complainant that the complainant isaccount holder of the OP bank. The complainant submits that on 09.07.2022 a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been debited from his account pertaining to OP bank.The complainant contended that without his knowledge and his consent the OP bankhas debited Rs.20,000/- from his account to unknown person’s account. It is further submittedby the complainant that on 09.07.2022 the complainant received phone call from unknown person and the person who has called the complainant has introduced himself as Manager from the Canara Bank and taken his OTP from the complainant and accordingly a sum of Rs.20,000/- isdebited from the complainant account from the unknown person. The complainant has also alleged that OP has cheated the complainant without his knowledge and consent they have debited aforesaid amount from his account. Upon which complainant has lodged police complaint with the concerned police on 05.07.2022. Despite of the police complaint, the complainant has not received reply from the concerned for his complaint. Aggrieved by the act of the OP the complainant was forced to file the present complaint.

3. Notice to OP-duly served, remained absent and placed exparte.

4. The complainant filed chief-examination affidavit along with relevantdocuments  in support of their pleadings.

5. Heard arguments. The matter is reserved for order.

6. The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the Complainant prove that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP as alleged in the complaint and thereby prove that he is entitle for the relief sought?
2. What order?

7. The findings on the above points are as under:

Point No.1                :       Negative

Point No.2                :       As per final order

REASONS

8. POINT NO.1:-From the perusal of the complaint averments, it is clear that the complainant is  account holder of the OP bank. On 09.07.2022, a sum of Rs.20,000/- has been debited from the account of the complainant pertaining to OP bank.  The complainant contended  that without his knowledge and his consent the OP bank  has debited Rs.20,000/- from his account to unknown person’s account. It is also specifically contended by the complainant that on 09.07.2022 the complainant received phone call from unknown person and the person who has called the complainant has introduced himself as manager from the Canara Bank and taken his OTP from the complainant and accordingly a sum of Rs.20,000/- is  debited from the complainant account by the unknown person. The complainant has also alleged that OP has cheated the complainant without his knowledge and consent they have debited aforesaid amount from his account. Upon which complainant has lodged police complaint with the concerned police on 15.07.2022. Despite of the police complaint, the complainant has not received reply from the concerned for his complaint.

9. From the perusal of the complaint allegations as against OP and also exhibits which are produced as annexure documents in the complaint, wherein it is crystal clear that the complaint has lodged complaint with the  OP on 17.11.2022 with respect to the illegal and unauthorized debit of Rs.20,000/- from his account and the chief examination affidavit it is sworn by the complainant at para-4, the complainant has clearly and categorically admitted that when the illegal debit of amount is made by some 3^rd party upon receiving phone call. The complainant has admitted that he has provided OTP to the fraudster. This fact of admission by complainant is clear case, wherein the complainant he himself has provided OTP to the 3^rd party, who is fraudster, who has debited amount of Rs.20,000/- from complainant account by taking OTP from the complainant himself. This piece of admission clearly goes to show that the complainant when he himself has provided OTP  which is received by him to the 3^rd party fraudster the question of blaming the OP bank does not arise. Without verifying the phone call of the 3^rd party how can the complainant reveal the OTP which is received by him. This act and conduct of the complainant clearly show that he has acted in careless and negligent manner by providing OTP to the 3^rd party fraudsterto withdraw an amount Rs.20,000/- from his account. For his wilful and negligent act the complainant cannot blame the OP bank and as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India, even the complaint of illegal debit. Only if the complaint is lodged well within 03 working days and OP bank should have been held liable to refund the said amount. In this complaint, as per documents produced by the complainant it clearly shows the transaction took place on 09.07.2022 and the complainant lodged complaint with the OP bank on 17.11.2022. The present complaint is filed after expiry of 04 months, the question of OP bank held liable to pay the illegally debited amount to the complainant does not arise for consideration as the complaint is made to the OP bank only after expiry of 4-5 months.  Such being the case, the complainant failed to prove the defence on the part of the OP Bank.

10. In view of the above discussion, by considering the facts of the complaint  andaverments and also by taking note of the annexure documents which are produced by the complainant, the complaint filed by the complainant deserves to be dismissed for the above reasons.Accordingly, the Point No.1 we answer in Negative.

11. POINT NO.2:- In the result, we passed the following:

                             ORDER

1. The complaint is hereby dismissed. No costs.
2. Furnish free copy of this order to both the parties. 

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed, typed by him and corrected by me, then pronounced in the Open Commission on 29^stMay 2023)

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)       

 MEMBER                                  MEMBER

Witness examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit:Sri K.J.Venkatesh-who being the complainant

Documents produced by the complainant:

Witness examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit:Nil

Documents produced by the OP: Nil

(RAMACHANDRA M.S.)

PRESIDENT

(NANDINI H KUMBHAR)          (CHANDRASHEKAR S.NOOLA)

         MEMBER                                     MEMBER

SKA*