H. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION SHIMLA.

First Appeal No.: 329/2023 Date of Presentation: 19.12.2023 Order reserved on: 13.10.2025 Date of Decision: 15.10.2025 …………………………………………………………………

BHIM APP NPCI Registered Office at National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI)

1001A, B Wing, 10^th Floor, The Capital, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051.

…....... Appellant/Opposite Party No.1 Versus

1. Shri Jagan Nath, Son of Shri Shetu Ram, Resident of Village Nathan, Post Office Bhekhali, Tehsil and District Kullu, H.P.

........Respondent/Complainant

2. State Bank of India, Through its Branch Manager, Solan Branch, District Solan, H.P.

Also at: Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhavan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021.

........Respondent/Opposite Party No.2 …………………………………………………………………

Coram Hon’ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President Hon’ble Ms. Yogita Dutta, Member Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes.

For Appellant: Mr. Dhiraj Kanwar, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1: Ms. Rajbindra Kumari, Advocate, vice Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, Advocate For Respondent No.2: Ms. Kiran Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate.

…………………………………………………………………

1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?

Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President O R D E R:

Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated 20.10.2023 of learned District Consumer Commission, Kullu, passed in Consumer Complaint No.13/2019, titled Jagan Nath Versus BHIM APP NPCI & Anr., whereby the complaint was allowed qua the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.1 was directed to pay Rs.20,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till its realization/deposit. The opposite party No.1 was also directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- as litigation costs.

Brief facts of Case:

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant was having two saving bank accounts i.e. one with State Bank of India, Solan bearing No.31778624128 and another with Punjab National Bank, Branch Sultanpur, Kullu, bearing No.4448001500010216. On 07.10.2018, the complainant transferred Rs.20,000/- from his SBI account (Branch Solan), to PNB account (Branch Sultanpur Kullu), through opposite party No.1/BHIM APP, however, the transaction could not be completed as the beneficiary bank was off-line. On 08.10.2018 the complainant again transferred Rs.20,000/- from his SBI account (Branch Solan) to PNB account (Branch Sultanpur Kullu), but the said transaction failed due to the reason funds insufficient in SBI Solan account. The complainant inquired and came to know that the amount of Rs.20,000/- stood transferred automatically on 08.10.2018 through opposite party No.1/BHIM APP, but was not credited in the account of complainant with PNB (Branch Sultanpur Kullu). The complainant made a written complaint to the opposite party No.1/BHIM APP, but nothing was done. The complainant also issued legal notice to the opposite parties, but his grievance was not resolved. By alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has filed the complaint before District Commission.

3. The opposite party No.1/BHIM APP filed reply and stated that complainant had transferred Rs.20,000/- through opposite party No.1 from his SBI Account (Branch Solan) to PNB account (Branch Sultanpur Kullu). There was some technical defect in the system of the beneficiary bank (PNB Branch Sultanpur Kullu) and the amount was accordingly reversed to the opposite party No.2/SBI (Branch Solan). It was the opposite party No.2/SBI (Branch Solan), who could explain about the transaction in question because as per original transaction status the amount of Rs.20,000/- was successfully transferred and thereafter the same was reversed in the saving bank account of the complainant with opposite party No.2/SBI (Branch Solan). The opposite party No.1 has no excess to the bank account as well as system of th