The commission was hearing a complaint filed by one Shakti Singh Malhotra, who had an account in IndusInd Bank and allegedly got a message of Rs 50,000 withdrawal when only Rs 40,000 was successfully withdrawn from an SBI ATM.

SBI liable, not IndusInd Bank: Court

• The commission noted that SBI failed to provide any CCTV Footage, ATM journal printout or any other primary electronic evidence.
• It noted that SBI did not appear despite the duly served notice.
• The commission found that IndusInd Bank had conducted an investigation at its level on the record provided by SBI Bank and apprised the complainant about the same.
• The consumer body thus held that IndusInd Bank cannot be held liable in this matter.
• The commission directed SBI to refund the disputed amount of Rs 10,000 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of debit till its realisation.
• The consumer body further directed SBI to pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for deficiency in service and mental harassment and agony.
• The SBI was also directed to pay Rs 3,000 as litigation expenses to the complainant within 30 days.

ATM cash withdrawal dispute

The case of the complainant, a customer of IndusInd Bank, is that on August 6, 2022, he tried to make an ATM withdrawal from the account and made five transactions out of which four times an amount of Rs 40,000 was dispensed, but the fifth time no money was dispensed from the said SBI ATM.

The complainant claimed that after withdrawing the said money, he got messages from IndusInd Bank and realised that an amount of Rs 50,000 was deducted from his account. It was further pleaded that the complainant tried to contact the bank concerned and raised a complaint, but no proper resolution was provided by the bank.

The complainant alleged that he had been following up for so many days, during which he had to face harassment and mental agony due to the deficiency of service on the part of the bank concerned, which is a matter of great shame and regret.

He added that due to IndusInd Bank’s mala fide act and conduct, the complainant got duped of his hard-earned money in an erroneous way and due to the same, he has not been able to live a life on his own accord.

He added that due to this illegal act and conduct of the bank concerned, he suffered great loss, mental agony, physical harassment and inconvenience. The complainant was represented by advocate Vijay Abrol in the matter.

Third-party ATM used: IndusInd Bank

IndusInd Bank argued that there is no unfair trade practice on its part and that the present complaint is not maintainable since there is no deficiency of service from its side.

It was stated that the complainant had used a third-party ATM of the SBI, on the basis of which IndusInd Bank followed up with that bank for the chargeback, but did not receive it from SBI till date.

It was contended that IndusInd Bank was not liable to make any refund to the complainant as the alleged withdrawals were made from the ATM of SBI and, as per investigations and information received from SBI, all five transactions were successful, and no excess cash was found in the said ATM.

Significance of ruling

This ruling highlights that banks operating ATMs cannot escape liability merely by asserting that a transaction was successful. If they fail to produce records proving that the cash was actually dispensed, they may be held liable for deficiency in service and directed to compensate the consumer.

For consumer-related grievances, individuals may contact the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 or 1800-11-4000 for assistance.