Order No.2                      

Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present.

The case is taken up for admission hearing.

The case of the complainant is that she is a student currently pursing Doctorate Degree in history from Delhi University having her residence at Premises No. 38/1, Prem Chand Boral Street, P.S.- Muchipara, Kolkata 700 012 having a savings account since 16/02/2004 with the opposite party Canara Bank, Sealdah Branch bearing no.0396101022680.

She is also having debit card facility since October, 2020-2021 in connection of the said savings bank account.

On 26/11/2022 at about 10.12 AM and 10.15 AM respectively,  the complainant received two SMS in her registered mobile phone number 8621945412 showing debit for sum of Rs.86,000/- (Rupees eighty six thousand) only and Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) only from her aforementioned savings bank account though she had not made those transactions. Neither did she share any OTP or click any unknown link at that time or before.

Suspecting fictitious, unauthorized  and fraudulent transaction she immediately made a complaint with the Customer Care Service of the opposite party with a request to block her savings bank account as well as her debit card facility on and from 26/11/2022. She also lodged General Diary with Muchipara P.S. vide GDE No.2054 dated 26/11/2022. On 28/11/2022 the complainant made a written complaint with the opposite party and requested to return her lost money as she had no fault for the said fraudulent transactions.

On 28/11/2022 she also lodged a complaint with the Bank Fraud Section, Detective Department, Lalbazar, Kolkata being complaint no.BFS/DD/24460 dated 28/11/2022.

The Muchipara P.S. drawn FIR being No.233 dated 30/11/2022 and started investigation.

On 06/12/2022 the opposite party considering several complaints FIR lodged by the complainant for partially returned a sum of Rs.26,920/- (Rupees twenty six thousand nine hundred and twenty) only out of total claim of Rs.96,000/-(Rupees ninety six thousand) only and credited the same in the savings bank account of the complainant. The opposite party in spite of several requests did not refund rest amount to the complainant.

So, the complainant lodged the complaint before  the banking ombudsman RBI, Kolkata on 18/01/2023.

According to the complainant with prior to each and every on line transaction it is mandatory upon the opposite party to forward messages and OTPs to the complainant’s  registered mobile number in order to verify the same prior to the transactions. But he opposite party without verification of the same facilitated both the fraudulent transactions which pin point inadequacies in their system of vigilance in place and also of cyber security call and that amounts to deficiency in service.

Therefore, the opposite party is liable to refund the rest amount to the savings bank account of the complainant with interest and to pay compensation and litigation cost.

From the facts disclosed in the complaint application it is evident that it requires specialized investigation to unearth the truth.

The Consumer Protection Act,2019 has been enacted with a object to provide for better protection of the interest of the consumer. To serve the purpose of the Act, various quasi judicial Forums are set up at the District, State and National level being District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

These quasi judicial Forums, observing the principle of natural justice are empowered to give relief of a specific nature and to award, whether appropriate compensation to the consumers to impose penalty for non compliance with their orders.

Facts and nature of the instant case requires a specialized technical investigation to arrive at a conclusion regarding the fraudulent transactions in the savings bank account of the complainant. Such specialized technical expertise of investigation cannot be undertaken by a quasi judicial Forum.

It appears from the facts narrated by the complainant that she has already filed complaint before the police authority and the special department i.e. Banking Fraud Section, Detective Department, Lalbazar, Kolkata and investigation is in progress

In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion  that the present case is not fit to be proceeded in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and liable to be rejected.

Hence, it is

                                                            O R D E R E D

that the complaint case be and the same is dismissed without cost.

Dictated by me

…...............

President