A bank is deficient in its service if it allows amounts to be withdrawn from an account holder's account without his/her instructions and is liable for the loss caused to the account holder due to unauthorized withdrawal.

JUGDMENT - Justice G.G. LONEY, President.:—The complainant has alleged serious deficiencies in the working of the State Bank of India in her complaint. Shortly stated, the facts are that the complainant had a savings bank account bearing No. 11059/57 with the State Bank of India, Juhu-Tara Branch, Bombay having a deposit of Rs. 80,000/-. Another Account No. 11058/57 was in the name of her son having a balance of Rs. 95,000/- and the third Account No. 11056/57 was in the name of her major daughter Parizaad Fitter, with the balance of Rs. 80,000/-. According to the complainant by the end of February 1989, Rs. 80,000/- each have been withdrawn from the aforesaid three accounts aggregating to Rs. 2,40,000/- by the complainant's ex-husband Minoo Fitter. According to complainant, the opposite parties allowed Minoo Fitter to withdraw the aforesaid amount through three accounts without having any source of authority to operate those accounts. The complainant further alleged that she informed this fact to one Mrs. Lele, employee of the opposite party No. 2, who in turn discussed the matter with Mr. Joshi of the same Branch in her presence. The complainant was accompanied by one Mrs. Yasmin Ghaswalla. The complainant further alleged that in the presence of Mrs. Ghaswalla, both Mrs. Lele and Mr. Joshi admitted that they had no record to show that Minoo Fitter was having any authority from the account-holders to withdraw the amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- from the above referred three accounts. At the instance of complainant, her solicitors M/s. D.H. Nanavati, addressed a letter dated 25-3-1989 to the opponents to credit the amounts withdrawn in the three respective accounts. In reply the opponents by their letter dated 25-4-1989 admitted to look into the matter. It seems that Rs. 80,000/- were credited in the account of complainant's daughter but so far as her own account and her son's account are concerned, Rs. 1,60,000/- has not been credited till the date of filing of this complaint.

2. In short, the allegations of the complainant are that the service of the opposite party was seriously deficient, in as much as without the advice and instructions of the accounts holders, the opposite party permitted withdrawal of the amounts from their accounts without any authority to operate the accounts by Minoo Fitter. The complainant, therefore, claims Rs. 1,60,000/- together with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. plus Rs. 10,000/- as costs and Rs. 50,000 as compensation. In response to a notice under section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 dated 3-6-1992, the complainant and opposite parties filed a written version. Inter alia, the opposite parties submitted that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and in the absence of Minoo Fitter, as a necessary party, the complaint may be referred for decision to Civil Court. It is also submitted that for the just decision of this complaint evidence is required to be adduced and that complaint is barred by limitation.

3. We have heard the complainant with Shri Sayyad Akhtar, Advocate and Shri Dharmadhikari, Advocate for opposite party. The withdrawal of amount from the complainant's account and from her daughter and son's accounts by Minoo Fitter as alleged in the complaint at the relevant time is not in dispute. Similarly, restoration of balance in respect of daughter's Account No. 11056/57 is also not in dispute. In reply the opposite party in para 7-A admitted to have cleared three cheques for Rs. 80,000/- each in favour of Minoo Fitter in good faith. Similarly, in Para 7-C, it is also admitted that on oral representation of Minoo Fitter, the State Bank allowed him to withdraw the amount from the three Accounts.

4. The admission of the opposite party is very elloquent as regards the withdrawal made by Minoo Fitter. But the opposite party failed to establish that there was any advice or any written instructions from the three account holders to operate their account by Minoo Fitte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document