ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE Vs. NANDKISHORE VISHWANATH SHINGNE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 11.10.2012 passed by the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 163 of 2011 Oriental Bank of Commerce Vs. Dr. Nandkishore Vishwan Singne by which, while dismissing appeal, order of District Forum allowing complaint was upheld.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/respondent had account with OP/petitioner Bank since 2005. OP provided facility of internet banking and provided him internet ID and password for online transactions and he utilized this facility lastly on 7.11.2009. On 21.6.2010, he received call from Manager of OP. Then he went to OP bank and was intimated that someone has internet transactions from his account and has withdrawn Rs.37,500/- on 17.6.2010 between 12.20 to 01.30 p.m. Manager further informed him that money was transferred firstly in Kamal Verma's Account in OP's Branch at Gurgaon, then transferred to the Account of Zia Mohd. Nazir and Rizwan Pawar in OP's Mira Road Branch and amount was withdrawn through ATM at Vashi. It was further submitted that Manager assured him that money will be received back, but later on, refused to credit money in his account. It was further submitted that internet banking system used by OP is not full proof, so, money was withdrawn from his account. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP, complainant filed complaint before District forum. OP resisted complaint and submitted that OP offered service of net-banking to complainant after providing internet ID and password. Services provided by OP are certified Very Sign confirming and OP has secured internet banking as per international standards. It was further submitted that complainant was explained precautions to be taken in internet banking. Complainant was responsible for keeping ID and password secretly. Transactions could have been done either by the complainant himself or by the person to whom he provided password, etc. Denying any deficiency on their part, prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District forum after hearing both the parties allowed complaint and directed OP to pay Rs.37,500/- along with cost of Rs.5,000/-. Appeal filed by OP was dismissed by learned State Commission with cost of Rs.10,000/- vide impugned order against which, this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) None appeared for respondent even after service and he was proceeded ex-parte.