BANK OF BARODA, BRANCH NARAHI Vs. SOMANTH CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. With their consent and after having heard the learned counsel at length, the matter is being disposed of finally at this admission stage itself.

(2.) The contention raised in this appeal is that the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission) relying on the Circular of the Reserve Bank of India has proceeded to allow the complaint on the assumption that it cannot be ruled out that the employees of the Bank were in connivance with some imposter who might have hacked the account of the complainant (respondent no.1).

(3.) The contention raised on behalf of the appellant Bank is that merely relying on the Circular and without recording any finding on the facts relating to the transaction, the impugned order has been passed and as such the order cannot be sustained as it is bereft of any material or reasons to support the conclusions drawn as an opinion by the State Commission.