Skip to main content

Onus on consumers to protect bank passwords - Maharashtra state Consumer Redressal Commission


The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on Wednesday dismissed a complaint filed by a man who alleged that his credit card had been fraudulently used to book air tickets worth Rs 32,000. "Since the transaction is effected by using the credit card and a secret password of the complainant, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the opponent (bank). In such cases, the complainant should have approached the cyber crime branch," the panel said.

On October 14, 2009, an amount of Rs 34,529 was debited from Balkatta Hegade's account. On inquiring with ICICI Bank Ltd, he was told his card was used to purchase air tickets from a travel and tour company. He contended he had not purchased the tickets and that his password was used. He stated that during the transaction, his signature was not taken on the voucher.

Hegade said the name, number and address on which the tickets were drawn were fraudulent. He issued a notice in April 2010 to the bank, requesting them to cancel the entry. As the bank did not respond favourably, Hegade filed a complaint in a district forum.

The bank contended that the transaction was done using a credit card and the password, which was known only to Hegade. The bank said that it had provided Hegade with the details of the transaction and had told Hegade to file an FIR, but he did not taken any action.

The forum dismissed Hegade's complaint, following which he filed an appeal in the state commission. The commission said Hegade had expected the bank to cancel the tickets and invalidate the online transaction. "The opponent (bank) does not have the powers to cancel the tickets and to invalidate the online transaction," the panel said.

Article referred:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Onus-on-consumers-to-protect-bank-passwords/articleshow/19641171.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more