Skip to main content

A serious grey area - Fraud in net banking

HDFC to pay for negligence

The National Consumer Disputes Commission last week ruled that HDFC Bank was negligent by not verifying the signatures on applications for net banking and electronic money transfer, leading to siphoning of money from the salary account of one Swapan Kumar. According to his complaint, bank officials conniving with a former security guard of the bank, forged his signatures on applications. Ordering compensation, the commission observed that "had the concerned bank manager been careful, he would have rejected the applications… The official at least on noting the difference in signatures was expected to contact the complainant to verify them."

 Article referred: http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/disparity-in-computing-compensation-115112200776_1.html

 Note:
This is a potentially dangerous situation. In this case, the plaintiff was a able prove that he had not applied for net banking. But with the all pervading presence of net based transactions, it would a minority who today does not opt for net banking. Now if someone had applied for it and had the same thing had happened with him what happened to the Plaintiff here, what would he do ? It appears that all the bank has to do is show that you had applied for net banking and allege that you must have shared your details with a third person. Then the onus is on you to disprove their allegation. This to my mind is a serious grey area.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

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

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

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more