The State Bank of India (SBI) has been held accountable for a defect in service by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri, for disclosing a customer's personal bank account information to his employer without that customer's permission.
According to the Commission, a bank cannot give a third party access to a customer's personal banking information without the customer's permission. According to the ruling, this kind of unapproved disclosure is against banking standards and constitutes a service defect.
The complainant, Pankaj Kumar Shukla, had a savings account with SBI’s Hargaon Branch in Sitapur. He was working with Govind Sugar Mill.
A labour dispute was pending before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. During the case, Govind Sugar Mill filed a counter affidavit containing details of Shukla’s savings account.
Shukla alleged that SBI had shared his bank account details with his employer without his consent. He also claimed that the account statement contained some incorrect entries, which were later corrected by the bank.
The complainant said that the unauthorized disclosure of his personal banking information and the incorrect entries caused him mental agony, physical hardship and financial loss. He approached the bank and sought an explanation and correction of the account details.
However, he was not satisfied with the bank’s explanation regarding the disclosure of his account information. He then filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri.
In his complaint, Shukla sought compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and litigation costs.
SBI contended that the complaint was unmaintainable and denied any service deficiencies. According to the bank, Shukla worked at Govind Sugar Mill, and his pay was credited to the employer's bank account.
SBI claims that the account statement was solely given to the employer in order to balance salary payments. According to the bank, the information was disclosed in compliance with banking procedures and at the employer's request.
Additionally, SBI asserted that the complainant's account included no inaccurate entries. The bank asked the Commission to reject the complaint and denied disclosing any private information without permission.
However, the Consumer Commission observed that Shukla’s savings account was his personal bank account. The bank had shared details of the account with his employer without obtaining his consent.
The Commission held that a bank cannot disclose a customer’s personal banking information to a third party without the customer’s permission.
It concluded that the unauthorized disclosure was a clear violation of banking norms and amounted to deficiency in service.
Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed SBI to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for the mental agony and physical hardship caused to the complainant.
The Commission also directed the bank to pay 6% annual interest on the compensation amount from the date the complaint was filed until the amount is paid.
In addition, SBI was directed to pay ₹5,000 towards litigation costs. The complaint against the remaining opposite parties was dismissed.
