Karnataka consumer court orders SBI to waive off of Rs 4.09 lakh transaction, says bank failed to respond to customer complaint in credit card fraud case

After Manikanta shared the details, Rs 3.60 lakh was transferred from his account without his knowledge. On April 12, 2023, the same person called him to say that his credit card bills were pending and instructed him to deposit the said amount.

Manikanta then went to Mangaluru’s Crime Branch Police station and the police called the credit card department of SBI and enquired about the transaction. The SBI staff told the police no such transaction had taken place from the bank. After checking again on April 18 at 6 pm, the credit card department replied that there was no transaction but at 7 pm, the same staff informed Manikanta that there was a transaction.

Manikanta later filed a FIR at the CEN Police Station in Mangaluru saying his credit card had insurance of up to Rs 2 lakh but SBI’s Belthangady branch had given him a credit card limit of Rs 5 lakh and insured only for Rs 2 lakh instead of Rs 5 lakh. Manikanta also contended that SBI’s credit card collection team repeatedly called him from different numbers demanding him to pay Rs 4.09 lakh or threatened to release the amount of Rs 11 lakh which he had as a fixed deposit in the same bank.

In its submission to the court, SBI refuted Manikanta’s claims that it threatened him it would release his fixed deposit money but said the pending repayment was put on hold. The bank also claimed that Manikanta had shared the credentials like OTP due to his negligence and there was no such deficiency in service on its part.

In its order, the consumer court cited the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)’s guidelines of customer protection limiting the liability of customers in unauthorised electronic banking transactions. “Third-party breach where the deficiency lies neither with the bank nor with the customer but lies elsewhere in the system, and the customer notified the bank within three working days of receiving the communication from the bank regarding the unauthorised transaction,” said the order.

The court said the credit card department was informed about the calls on April 12, 2023, which was within the stipulated RBI guidelines of three days, and the complainant has ‘zero liability’. Citing service was deficient from the bank, Somashekarappa K Handigol, president, said in his order that SBI must quash the alleged transaction in the complainant’s account as well as the interest and penalty. He also directed the bank to pay Rs 20,000 for deficiency of service, mental agony, and inconvenience caused and Rs 10,000 towards litigation costs.