IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 18/12/2025 PRONOUNCED ON: 07/01/2026 REVISION PETITION NO. 102 OF 2022 (Against the Order dated 21.10.2021 in Appeal 825/2020 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Karnataka, Bengaluru Principal Bench)

With IA/1155/2022, IA/1156/2022 (stay, directions)

Indusind Bank Ltd., No. 61, G Block, Opp. To ICICI Bank, Sahakara Nagar Main Road, Sahakara Nagar, Bengaluru-92, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Petitioner Versus Smt Saroja, W/o A.G. Manoha, R/o No. 201, 4th B Cross, 3rd Block, HRB Layout, Kalyan Nagar, Bengaluru-43.

Respondent BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. P. SAHI, PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER For the Petitioner Mr. Lakshit Raj Gaur, Ms. Bhumika Chauhan, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. K.S. Badrinath, Mr. Sabarish Subramanain, Advocates

ORDER

PER BHARATKUMAR PANDYA, MEMBER

1. The present Revision Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/opposite party against the order dated 21.10.2021 passed by the State Commission, Karnataka, in First Appeal No. 825 of 2020, whereby while confirming the order of the District Forum, appeal of the OP bank was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent/complainant approached petitioner bank on 01.08.2014 for opening of a saving account. The same was opened and the mobile number and email of the respondent got registered with the petitioner bank. Between 23.04.2019 to 27.04.2019, SMSs were sent to the mobile number of the respondent about logins of the saving account over the Net Banking but respondent did not gave any response to the SMSs. However, on 11.05.2019, respondent lodged an FIR with the police for fraudutent transfer of an amount of Rs.1,42,933/-

from his bank account. On 13.05.2019 Respondent filed a written complaint with the petitioner stating that there was unauthorized online transaction in her account and someone credited Rs.8,11,203.84 and debited 9,54,137.09 and the respondent further informed that she has only lost about Rs. 1,42,933.25/-. After thorough examination and investigation on the complaint of the respondent, petitioner Bank vide letter dated 07.08.2019 apprised the Respondent that login can be done only with the login id and password which are confidential details and are known to the customer only and the confidential details might have been shared by the respondent to someone knowingly or unknowingly. On 12.09.2019, the Respondent sent legal notice to the petitioner but when bank did not respond to her legal notice, she was compelled to file a consumer complaint bearing CC-1697/2019 before the Bangalore Urban II additional District consumer dispute Redressal Bangalore. As per the petitioner bank, District Forum, without giving them the opportunity of being heard, passed an impugned order dated 22.06.2020 in favour of the respondent/complainant which is reproduced as under:

u

12. POINT NO. 3: Having regard to the discussion made in the preceding paragraphs and after considering the evidence and material available on the record, the opposite party is liable to pay Rs.9,52,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of complaint till realization and pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards cost, of...

litigation to the complainant. We proceed to pass the following final;

ORDER The complaint is allowed in part.

The opposite party bank is directed to pay Rs.9,52,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Fifty Two Thousand only) with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of complaint till realization to the complainant.

The opposite party is also directed to pay Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) towards compensation and Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards cost of litigation to the Complainant.”

3. Being aggrieved by the order dated 22.06.2020 passed by the District Forum, petitioner bank preferred an appeal, before the State Commission. State Commission, after appreciating the facts and evidences on record, dismissed