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

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more