The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri, comprising President Abhimanyu Lal Srivastava and Members Dr. Alok Kumar Sharma and Smt. Joohi Quddusi, has held the State Bank of India (SBI) liable for deficiency in service for disclosing a customer's personal bank account details to his employer without his consent. The Commission observed that a bank cannot share a customer's personal banking information with a third party without the customer's consent and held that such unauthorized disclosure amounted to a violation of banking norms and deficiency in service.

Brief Facts

The complainant, Pankaj Kumar Shukla, maintained a savings account with the State Bank of India, Hargaon Branch, Sitapur, while working with Govind Sugar Mill. During the pendency of a labour dispute before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Govind Sugar Mill filed a counter affidavit containing details of his savings account. The complainant alleged that the account details had been shared with his employer without his consent and that the statement contained certain incorrect entries, which were subsequently corrected by the bank.

Claiming that the unauthorized disclosure of his personal banking information and the inaccurate entries caused him mental agony, physical hardship and financial loss, he approached the bank seeking an explanation and rectification.

Not satisfied with the bank's explanation regarding the disclosure of his account information, the complainant filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri, seeking compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and litigation costs.

Contentions of the Bank

The State Bank of India denied any deficiency in service and contended that the complaint was not maintainable. It submitted that the complainant was an employee of Govind Sugar Mill and his salary was credited through the employer's account maintained with the bank. According to the bank, the account statement was furnished to the employer only for reconciliation of salary payments upon the employer's request and in accordance with banking practice. The bank further asserted that no incorrect entries had been made in the complainant's account and that no unauthorized disclosure of confidential information had taken place. It, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Observations and Decision

The Commission observed that the complainant's savings account was his personal account and that the bank had disclosed its details to the employer without obtaining the complainant's consent. It held that the bank could not share a customer's personal banking information with a third party without obtaining the customer's consent. The Commission concluded that such unauthorized disclosure amounted to a clear violation of banking norms and constituted deficiency in service.

Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the State Bank of India to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for the mental agony and physical hardship caused to the complainant, along with 6% annual interest from the date of filing of the complaint until realization. It also awarded ₹5,000 towards litigation costs. The complaint against the remaining opposite parties was dismissed.

Case Title: Pankaj Kumar Shukla v. Chief Branch Manager, State Bank of India & Ors.

Case No.: CC/127/ 2022

Click Here To Read/Download Order