IMPORTANT POINT
Additional Evidence—Additional Evidence, produced at the Revisional stage cannot be relied upon, when the fora below had no opportunity to deal with the same.

ORDER

R.K. Agrawal, J., President—The present Revision Petition has been filed by State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as “the Petitioner Bank”), challenging the Order dated 15.09.2022, passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the State Commission”) in First Appeal No. 83 of 2018. Whereby, the State Commission has concurred with the finding of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the District Forum”) and dismissed the First Appeal. However, reduced the penal interest awarded by the District Forum in case the Petitioner Bank fails to refund the amount within 60 days from 9% per annum to 6% per annum.

2. The facts giving rise to the present Revision Petition are that the Complainant/ Respondent No.1 herein is having a Saving Bank Account (Pension) No. 10679599109 with the Petitioner Bank. He had also obtained the ATM (Debit) Card (ATM Card No. 6220180681200046040) with SMS alert facility. On 22.09.2015, the Complainant had withdrawn an amount of Rs.10,000/- at about 12.30 p.m. from the ATM of Punjab National Bank at Malviya Nagar, New Delhi. It is averred by the Complainant that after that transaction on 22.09.2015 he had not used his ATM Card for more than a month and had kept the ATM Card in SBI ATM Card Cover. On 05.11.2015, the Complainant came to know that a Cheuque issued by him in favour of BSES had been bounced due to insufficient fund. Thereafter, the Complainant contacted the SBI helpline regarding status of his Account and he was informed that the amount has been transferred or withdrawn using ATM Card. On 06.11.2015, the Complainant’s daughter on his behalf lodged a Complaint with the Police Authorities for fraudulent withdrawal of money from the Account of the Complainant.

3. It is alleged in the Complaint that the Complainant neither received any SMS nor any other communication regarding the frequent unusual heavy transactions/ withdrawals from the Petitioner Bank despite having been registered the mobile number with the Bank for SMS alert service for transactions, which is a chargeable service. It is further alleged that no message was received by him even after the amount fell below the Minimum Balance Limit. On 28.12.2015, the Complainant sent a Legal Notice to the Petitioner Bank. As the grievances of the Complainant remained unaddressed, he approached the District Forum by filing a Complaint alleging deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties in not receiving any message or communication in respect of fraudulent transactions, claiming amount of Rs.6,88,456/- along with interest @ 24% per annum, Rs.1,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and litigation cost.

4. The Complaint was resisted by the Petitioner Bank by filing the Written Statement. It is alleged in the Written Statement that the Complainant on his own passed the ATM Card and Pin to some other person who might had misused the same. It is stated that as per term and conditions of the ATM Card facility, it is the duty of the Card Holder to keep the ATM Card and PIN in his safe custody and possession, which in the present case the Complainant had failed to do so and for the negligence of the Complainant in keeping the ATM Card and Pin in safe custody, the Petitioner Bank cannot be made liable. Hence the petitioner Bank sought the dismissal of the Complaint with cost.

5. The District Forum on the basis of the material on record and evidences adduced before it, allowed the Complaint observing as under:—

“Now, the case of the gullible complainant is that he was never sent any SMS alert on his mobile phone though he had got the SMS alert facility activated on his mobile phone through OP-3. The case of OP-2 in this regard is that there is reasonable apprehension of the complainant being in collusion with some other person to extract money from OP-2 bank; the KYC