LAWS(NCD)-2015-8-14

HDFC BANK AND ORS. Vs. SHASHIKANT AND ORS.

Decided On August 07, 2015
Hdfc Bank And Ors. Appellant
V/S
Shashikant And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the orders dated 20.06.2008 passed by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 2186/2007 Mr. Shashikanth Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. & Ors. by which, while allowing appeal, order of District Forum dismissing complaint was set aside and complaint was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that complainants/respondents have joint S.B. Account with OP No. 2 Bank with effect from 27.7.2000, with facility of net banking. On 20.2.2007 complainant no. 2 received SMS on his mobile number from OP No. 2 informing and confirming a debit transaction of Rs.4,50,000/- dated 19.2.2007 by way of third party fund transfer through net banking to a beneficiary, who is actually unknown to the complainant. Immediately complainants approached OP No. 3, on enquiry they came to know that the said amount has been transferred in the name of one person Ananda Lingaraj Kolakar. Though complainants requested OP No. 3 to freeze his account, it went in vain. Again on verification complainants came to know that with effect from 17.2.2007. OP No. 2 provided a facility of third party fund transfer through net banking. At no point of time complainants have opted for the said facility, they have not consented for the same nor they allowed transfer of their fund under said TPT. The so called application filed for availing TPT facility was not submitted by the complainant No. 2. His signature is forged including his E-mail address. OP without verifying the said genuinness of the signature acted upon the said application. Ananda Lingraj Kolakar is a stranger to the complainants having no transaction of any kind with the said person. Due to the carelessness and negligence of OP, complainants were forced to face both mental agony and financial loss. The culprits by impersonation managed to open the beneficiary account and there is hacking of the PIN. Complainant felt the hand in glove of OP in the said transaction. Complainants have also lodged the criminal complaint to the police alleging the fraud and cheating, which is under investigation. Alleging deficiency on the part of OPs, complainant filed complaint before District forum. OP resisted complaint and submitted that while availing the facility of net banking an agreement came to be executed between the parties, under the said agreement customer ID and PIN is to be kept confidential. It is the complainants who have violated the said terms and conditions to the reasons best known to them. Complainant logged into a fictitious website just to enrich themselves and disclosed their customer ID and the password. The person who got the said information misused it, must have operated the complainants account for that OP cannot be blamed. Though complainants are aware of the fact of transfer of the said huge amount through net banking in favour of Ananda Lingaraj Kolakar an alleged beneficiary, he is not made as a party in this complaint nor any civil suit is filed for the recovery of the said amount. The compliant made by the complainants to the Banking Ombudsman has been rejected. Denying deficiency on the part of OP, prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District forum after hearing both the parties dismissed complaint. Appeal filed by complainants was allowed by learned State Commission vide impugned order and directed OPs to pay Rs.5,25,000/- with 6% p.a. interest against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.