Follow us on Google News
The Rajkot District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ordered the State Bank of India to refund Rs 1,59,999 with 9 percent annual interest to a 68-year-old customer after unauthorized withdrawals were made from his account through the Aadhaar-enabled Payment System. The consumer forum held the bank liable for deficiency in service, observing that the customer was deprived of his hard-earned savings despite prompt reporting. The bank has also been directed to pay litigation costs of Rs 10,000 to the complainant.
Multiple Unauthorized Withdrawals in Eight Days
The complainant, Dilip Chhatwani, a resident of Rajkot, held a savings account at the Amin Marg branch of the State Bank of India. According to Chhatwani, he had never activated the ATM card issued by the bank and had never opted for mobile or internet banking facilities. His banking transactions were conducted strictly through physical cheques.
Despite not enrolling in digital banking services, a sum of Rs 1,59,999 was siphoned from his account in multiple tranches between September 17 and September 25, 2023. All the transactions were carried out through the Aadhaar-enabled Payment System (AePS). Chhatwani stated that he had not sanctioned any of these transactions, nor had he shared any One-Time Password with anyone, completely denying any consent for the transfers.
Inaction Following Formal Police and Bank Complaints
Upon noticing the missing funds, the senior citizen submitted a written complaint to the Amin Marg branch of the bank on September 26, 2023. On the same day, he approached the Cyber Crime Cell seeking an investigation into the fraudulent debit and recovery of the lost money.
Advocate Chirag Chhag, representing the complainant, stated that the Cyber Crime Cell investigation indicated the disputed transactions had been authorized through official channels associated with bank personnel. Despite this finding, the customer received no financial redress from the lender. Chhatwani alleged that despite timely reporting, the bank failed to safeguard his money and neglected to take appropriate action to resolve the grievance, compelling him to approach the consumer commission.
Consumer Commission Cites Supreme Court Precedents
The matter was heard by a bench comprising President P. C. Raval and Member M. S. Bhatt at the Rajkot District Consumer Commission. Delivering the ruling in favor of the customer, the bench held that the bank was responsible for deficiency in service and delayed grievance redressal, as the customer was denied his legitimate deposits even after reporting the unauthorized debits immediately.
During the proceedings, the commission referenced Supreme Court rulings affirming that awarding interest as compensation is justified when a consumer is deprived of rightful funds due to service deficiencies. The forum directed the State Bank of India to credit Rs 1,59,999 to Chhatwani’s account with 9 percent annual interest, calculated from the date the complaint was filed until the realization of the full amount. In addition, the bank was directed to pay Rs 10,000 to cover legal expenses.
