* Consumer Court orders Bank of Maharashtra
Jalna: The case of transfer of money from the customer’s account without the consent of the customer was exposed in Bank of Maharashtra, Old Jalna. In this case, the Consumer Commission held the bank guilty of deficiency in service and issued orders to return the amount with interest and pay the complaint expenses due to harassment of the customer.
Ankit Ajay Puranik, a student of Sanjog Nagar, has a savings account in the Bank of Maharashtra Old Jalna branch. During the period from December 6, 2020, to April 9, 2021, an amount of Rs 7,860 from the savings account was transferred by the bank to other accounts. In this regard, Ankit Puranik made a written complaint to the bank administration and a legal notice was also sent through the lawyer, but the bank did not respond. Finally, Ankit complained to the District Consumer Commission through Adv Mahesh Dhannavat.
During the hearing before the commission, the appointed lawyer argued that the banking transactions through digital apps like mobile banking, UPI, Google Pay, Phone Pay, and with the help of appointment representatives from place to place for the convenience of the account holders. The amount of the account is transferred to other accounts online through an Aadhaar card and thumb. Such transfers are not possible without OTP. Only after this process, the money is deposited in the main account. But in response to this, adv Dhannavat raised many issues and said that in this whole matter, there is an error in the service of the bank. The bank must know in whose account the money has been deposited. The amount deducted from the bank account, the OTP sent, the message sent to the mobile number of the account holder, etc. was not presented by the bank before the commission. Money transfer is visible in the bank statement, but there is no information about whose account it has been transferred. The bank has also not disclosed the transfer done under various apps before the commission.
While issuing the order, the commission asked the bank to return the amount along with interest to the customer and pay Rs 5,000 as complaint expenses. This order was issued by District Consumer Grievance Redressal Commission Chairperson Neelima Sant, Member Manjusha Chitlange, Neeta Kankaria.
In this context, Adv Dhannavat said that the negligence of the banking system is visible in this whole matter. To date, even the bank is not aware of whose account the money has been transferred. After all, where did the money go, this question still stands. Where was the money transferred by the bank? It is necessary to have information that was not seen in this case.