Skip to main content

Freezing of account not deficiency in service: Consumer court


A consumer court has ruled that if a bank freezes account of a costumer in case of internet hacking or economic fraud, it cannot be treated as deficiency in service.

With this observation, the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has quashed the order passed by Anand's consumer court, by which the Axis Bank was ordered to pay Rs 5,000 towards mental harassment and Rs 2,000 towards cost of litigation to Vijay Sonvani after the bank froze his savings account.

Sonvani's savings account was blocked after somebody extracted Rs 18,000 from his account in Pune through internet hacking. Sonvani had no clue about this. When he went to withdraw money from an ATM in Ahmedabad, he found the debit facility on his debit card as blocked. On inquiry, it was revealed that the amount was siphoned off from his account on December 11, 2008.

After entering some communication with the bank, Sonvani filed a complaint with a consumer forum at Anand for causing hardship by freezing his account. He demanded of Rs 60,000 towards damages, but the forum in 2010 asked the bank to pay Rs 7,000 and 6% interest till the date he moved the consumer court.

The forum, however, accepted the bank's claims that the debit facility was stopped as precautionary measure and it was done in good faith. It was to prevent further fraud because a third person happened to know the password from Sonvani and withdrew the amount. The action was taken in the interest of the consumer.

Aggrieved with the forum's order to pay damages, the bank moved the commission, which arrived at the conclusion that the bank's gesture of freezing the account was in Sonvani's interest.

The commission also noticed that money cannot be withdrawn without card and password, and even the bank also does not know password. The person who withdrew money seemed to know it in Pune, and this could be negligence on part of Sonvani.

The bank immediately lodged complaint and when the money was recovered, the amount was immediately deposited in the savings account. This was no deficiency in the bank's service.

Our opinion
Unfortunately as the original order of the commission being in Gujarati, we have to make do with the newspaper report and base our opinion on the same.
This  is one of those cases where you can clearly see merits and demerits on both sides. The bank was clearly trying to protect the customer by freezing the account but what is not clear is how the Bank came to know of the security breach when the customer has not complained ?
There are big gaps in the story. Even going with the case as presented in the newpaper, the bank should definitely have informed the customer of the freezing of his account. A Bank simply cannot freeze operations a customer's account arbitrarily as that can have serious ripple effect. What if he had given a cheque for some important payment? There is a deficiency of service.
But to us the most serious issue here is the growing net based transactions and their legal implications. The Bank is offering the passwords to the client and the client is supposed to keep it secret. After that if a breach happens, it is impossible for the customer to defend himself from the accusation that he must have been careless and therefore at fault. Unless, the customer can convince the court otherwise, it will be very difficult to force the Bank to check in their own house for the same breach. And it should be remembered, that often it is at the Bank's end the lack of stringent measures to protect customer data has been noticed.
The average person these days have started embracing the net and are not at all serious or very casual about transacting on the net. Net transactions are growing rapidly but unfortunately not the legal protections or clarity available to both the buyer and seller.
Article referred to
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-02-01/ahmedabad/36683589_1_consumer-court-consumer-forum-debit

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more