Sharing woman’s joint account statement with her husband costs SBI Rs 50,000

CHANDIGARH:The district consumer forum has imposed a penalty of Rs 50,000 on the State Bank of India (SBI) for sharing the bank account statement of two joint accounts with a woman’s husband without her authority.

Sandeep Rana

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, May 5

The district consumer forum has imposed a penalty of Rs 50,000 on the State Bank of India (SBI) for sharing the bank account statement of two joint accounts with a woman’s husband without her authority.

The court has directed the Sector 17 and Kanpur branches of the SBI to jointly and severally pay the amount to the complainant for causing mental agony and harassment on account of deficiency in service within 45 days of its receipt.

Richa Garg, a resident of Sector 45, in a complaint filed in August 2015, had alleged that SBI officials acted in a deficient manner by providing the account details of two different accounts, which she jointly held with her husband Gautam Gupta and sister K Garg, respectively.

Richa came to know about it in August 2014 when her account statements were annexed in the district court in a family dispute case between the two. She alleged that her account statement had been illegally procured by the third party in connivance with some bank official.

She moved an application with the bank to investigate the matter, but it did nothing. The complainant later took this matter to the banking ombudsman, who imposed a penalty of Rs 5,000. However, the ombudsman “pressured the complainant” to settle the matter as “full and final settlement”, but she did not agree and approached the consumer forum.

In its reply, the SBI said it did not know about the complainant’s family dispute with her husband and this fact had been concealed by her in the complaint. It was also stated that the account statement of the complainant was supplied to her husband after obtaining the required documents from him. Gautam had mentioned in his application that the statement was required in connection with “financial credibility”.

“Even if we believe, Gautam, while claiming himself to be the husband of the complainant and placing on record a copy of his joint account with the complainant, could have at best sought information of his joint account with the complainant. He was in no manner connected with the other account, which was jointly maintained by the complainant with her sister. No information could have been supplied by the SBI unless there was an express authorisation by either of the account holders. The opposite party is found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant,” said the court order.