Banks owe a duty of care in securing locker contents, justified under Consumer Protection laws despite disputable ownership of the items.

1. The complainant Akhilesh Shivhare opened a joint savings bank account bearing account number 551702010169541 at branch Pashupati Nagar, Yashoda Nagar, Kanpur Nagar of Union Bank of India, the opposite party. As per the complainant the branch manager offered a locker facility to the complainants on nominal fees and promise to provide highly secured strong room equipped with modern technology security systems. On the assurance, the complainant applied for the locker facility and after fulfilling all the requirements and paying the requisite fees hired a locker facility at the branch office of the bank and got the locker number 49(SC) and thus became a consumer of the opposite party. The complainant has affirmed that he kept all his ornaments, jewelry and other valuable things including ornaments of son and daughter - in - law in this locker. The opposite party Bank gave one key to the complainant and kept another key with them apart of the master key.

2. According to complainant he and his family members including wife, son and daughter - in - law holds no other locker in any of the bank in India except this locker.

3. Allegedly, on date 17/18.2.2018 midnight a theft was committed by some unknown miscreants where in 32 lockers were broken open by cutting them with a gas cutter and all valuables were taken away by them. The complainant alleged that all valuable things including items of jewelry, ornaments and other valuable things were stolen from this particular locker number 49(SC) which approximately value Rs.29,52,000(Rupees twenty nine lacs fifty two thousand). List of those stolen articles has been mentioned in the complaint.

4. The complainant has alleged that the theft was committed by the unknown miscreant due to lack of proper security and inadequate safety measures taken by the opposite party / Bank. The complainant lost all the valuables kept in the locker received by him and his family members from ancestors. It is further indicated by the complainant that the bank did not take adequate safety measures as per the normal duty of a bank as well as the measures provided in guidelines of Reserve Bank of India, as such no alarm was rang at the time of theft and no CCTV camera recorded the offence committed by the unknown miscreants. There was no guard in the bank to take care of the lockers and for security of the bank building and even the gun of the guard was kept in a safe custody. The wall of bank premises was only 9-10 feet high and is only 5 inch wide and also there was an open plot adjacent to the bank which made the premises and lockers therein unsecured and this situation, from where anyone can easily jump inside and it was against the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India.

5. The complaint alleges that the bank did not complied security audit report dated 8.2.2017, which directed the banks to build the wall on the North side and place sharp wires on it to enhance security, but nothing was done by the bank. The guidelines of Reserve Bank of India provides that the branch manager of each branch should inspect alarm system everyday but this was not done by the branch manager of the opposite party / Bank. Beside modern electric and electronic security gadgets like CCTV alarm system sensor were not adequately provided in the bank.

6. According to the complaint a first information report was lodged at police station - Naubasta, Kanpur Nagar, thereupon the police apprehended 11 culprits out of 13 who