Ahmedabad, December 8: In a bizarre incident, a bank in Gujarat was fined for sharing the account details of the man with his wife without consulting him. Reports inform that the Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) was fined Rs 10,000 for furnishing three years’ bank account statements. According to a report by TOI, the man, identified as Dinesh Pamnani, sued the bank for giving his personal details to his wife, the Ahmedabad District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum ordered the IOB to pay Rs 10,000 to an account holder of its Sardarnagar-Hansol branch. The report further stated that Pamnani argued in court that he has a matrimonial dispute and his wife could furnish the bank statement to the court, to use it to her advantage. SBI Orders Recovery of Compensation Paid to 70,000 Employees of Associate Banks For Working Overtime Post Demonetisation.
The man came to know about the incident after he received messages on his registered mobile number in May 2017, stating that Rs 103 was deducted from his account. When he enquired in the bank, the authorities told him that the charge was levied after his wife, Harshika, had sought his bank statements. Pamnani claimed that he had not given his wife the authority to carry out any transaction and dragged it to consumer court.
It was found during the investigation that the bank defended itself and said that Harshika had come to the branch as the client’s agent and gave her the details as part of good service. Pamnani’s advocate C A Modi reiterated that the bank cannot give the account details to anyone without the account holder’s authorization. The advocate cited that his wife could supply the details to a court and it would be damaging to his prospects in the litigation before the family court.
The consumer court termed the act as a deficiency in service and ordered the bank to pay Rs 10,000 compensation to Pamnani for causing him pain, agony and legal expenditure. The Court stated that according to the Reserve Bank of India’s guidelines and bank rules, IOB could not have given the statements to a third party, without Pamnani’s authority letter and stated that the bank did not maintain the privacy of the account holder.