DEHRADUN: Uttarakhand Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directed State Bank of India (SBI) to give appropriate compensation to its customer with a refund in a case of card cloning after Roorkee resident Parthasarthi Mukherjee was defrauded of Rs 80,000 in 2015 when a fraudster withdrew money from two ATMs in Delhi.
The decision came after consumer court found the bank failed to provide CCTV footage to police for investigation and rejected the bank’s argument that the customer had shared the ATM card and password with someone else.
Mukherjee stated that on July 4, 2015, he received an SMS indicating that Rs 80,000 was withdrawn from ATMs of different banks in New Delhi. He promptly sent an email to the bank. It was found that an “unknown person had fraudulently withdrawn Rs 10,000 each through eight transactions”.
SBI stated that upon receiving intimation regarding withdrawal of the amount, prompt action was taken by the bank and it notified other banks concerned. “The complainants disclosed the ATM PIN to someone who had withdrawn the amount. There has not been any deficiency in service,” SBI said.
The state commission observed that police investigation could not be concluded for want of CCTV footage of the disputed transactions.
“On the basis of the evidence on record, we are of the considered opinion that the bank has committed deficiency in service,” the state commission said.
The decision came after consumer court found the bank failed to provide CCTV footage to police for investigation and rejected the bank’s argument that the customer had shared the ATM card and password with someone else.
Mukherjee stated that on July 4, 2015, he received an SMS indicating that Rs 80,000 was withdrawn from ATMs of different banks in New Delhi. He promptly sent an email to the bank. It was found that an “unknown person had fraudulently withdrawn Rs 10,000 each through eight transactions”.
SBI stated that upon receiving intimation regarding withdrawal of the amount, prompt action was taken by the bank and it notified other banks concerned. “The complainants disclosed the ATM PIN to someone who had withdrawn the amount. There has not been any deficiency in service,” SBI said.
The state commission observed that police investigation could not be concluded for want of CCTV footage of the disputed transactions.
“On the basis of the evidence on record, we are of the considered opinion that the bank has committed deficiency in service,” the state commission said.