STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 06.08.2023 Reserved on : 17.02.2026 Date of Decision : 13.03.2026

1. HDFC Bank, Branch Tarn Taran, Opposite Civil Hospital Tarn Taran, Tehsil and District Tarn Taran through its Branch Manager.

2. HDFC Bank Limited, registered office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai-400013.

The present Appeal has been filed through Sh.Rajiv Rattnam, Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Opposite Civil Hospital, Tarn Taran.

….Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1&2.

Versus

1. Ashok Kumar Bhatia, age about 64 years old S/o Kishan Lal Bhatia, R/o Opposite Civil Hospital, Tarn Taran, Tehsil &

District Tarn Taran.

….…Respondent No.1/Complainant.

2. HDFC Ergo Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd., Office at 7 Apsara, 1^st Floor, SV Road Santacruz-W, Mumbai-54 through its authorized Officer/Head.

….…Respondent No.2/Opposite Party No.3.

First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tarn Taran in CC No.50 of 2019.

Quorum:-

Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Presiding Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Yes/No Present:-

For the Appellants : Ms.Monika Thatai, Advocate For respondent No.1 : Sh.Rahi Mehtra, Advocate For respondent No.2 : Sh.Parvez Chugh, Advocate SIMARJOT KAUR, PRESIDING MEMBER :

The Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1&2 have filed the present Appeal to challenge the impugned order dated 18.04.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Tarn Taran (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Complainant had been allowed

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Complainant in the Complaint filed before the District Commission are that the Complainant was having his Bank account No.25721000000072 with the HDFC Bank-OP No.1. He had purchased a Forex Plus Card No.4726430003592650 from OP No.1 on 22.08.2017 having an amount of CAD 7750 (Canadian Dollars) for purpose of his travel to Canada. The card was got insured from the OP No.3. The Complainant was in some store at Ontario in Canada on 28.12.2017 (Canadian date), while he was there some unknown persons had attacked the said store and committed an armed dacoity. They had also snatched Forex Plus Card of the Complainant from him. After the said occurrence, the Complainant was taken to Hospital. The incident was reported to Canadian police (Occurrence No. 17-43568). The wife of the Complainant had immediately intimated his relative namely Paramjit Singh S/o Swaran Singh R/o Village Daburji, District Tarn Taran in India. Both his relatives had visited OP No.1 and reported the incident of dacoity on 29.12.2017 at 10:30 AM (Indian time). It was narrated to one Mr.Davinderpal Singh, Branch Manager and Mr.Sanjiv Bhatia-the officials of the Bank. They had further requested them to block the card. At 10:45 am, the Bank officials had contacted the Card Division and requested them to block the card belonging to the Complainant. The Bank officials had assured them that the card would be blocked immediately. At that time, the balance amount in the Card was CAD 5,785. When the Complainant had approached the Bank to credit the balance amount of card in his saving bank account, he was informed that the card was showing a negative balance of CAD -8. After obtaining the statement, he was surprised to learn that about 30 unauthorized ATM transactions (mostly CAD 201 and 203 each) had taken place on 29.12.2017 (Canadian date) from various locations. This had happened inspite of the assurance of the Bank officials that the card would be blocked. Had the Bank blocked the