AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Admit. Issue notice to respondent no. 2 because respondent no. 1, the complainant has already appeared through Mr. Vakul Sharma, Advocate.
Inter-alia it has been submitted on behalf of the Appellant that learned Adjudicating Officer has erred in exonerating the respondent bank of all its liability and burdening the Appellant with the entire loss of Rs. 27,53,183,00. According to learned counsel, the Appellant had taken a categorical plea in paragraph 7 of written arguments (Annexure A/10) that on 28th and 29th May, 2017 when allegedly three last fraudulent withdrawal have been made, not a single message or OTP was received on the mobile number of the complainant and this would show that the bank had acted irregularly and not followed the guidelines of RBI.
In view of the aforesaid stand, it would be for the bank to show the relevant facts/evidence.
Respondent may file their replies to the Memo of Appeal, particularly grounds as well as to the two MAs which have been filed along with Appeal within six weeks. MAs shall be considered on the next date. Time for rejoinder shall be considered on the next date.
The appellant wants stay of the impugned direction whereby it is required to pay an amount of Rs. 27,53,183.00 to respondent No. 1. Following the practice in such matters, Appellant is given liberty to deposit the amount in question with the Registry of this Tribunal. The deposit shall be in the name of Registrar, TDSAT who will keep the money under a Fixed Deposit with a Nationalised Bank and the same shall abide by further orders of this Tribunal.
To take advantage of this interim order, the Appellant should make the deposit within four weeks. If that is done, no coercive action shall be taken by the A.O. against the Appellant.
Post the matter under the head "For Directions" on 28.1.2022.