Calling it a “hidden agenda” to earn profits from interest, a Haryana District Consumer Commission has held State Bank of India (SBI) Cards liable for deficiency in service and ordered it to refund Rs 1.26 lakh, in addition to Rs 11,000 in compensation, to a man from whose inactive credit card the bank allegedly deducted money.A bench of president Rajbir Singh and members Jasvinder Singh and Suman Rana also awarded Rs 11,000 for mental agony and litigation costs.“On perusal of the documents placed on record, it reveals that it is the hidden agenda of the opponents not to deduct the total outstanding amount from the card holder which was having sufficient balance in his saving account, deduct the minimum amount/in part and calculated the interest on monthly basis to gain its profit, which is not justified, therefore, we have no hitch to reach at the conclusion that both the opponents are found guilty of deficient in service as well as of unfair trade practice. Hence, the present complaint deserves acceptance,” the commission said on July 15.The commission observed that, as financial institutions of the country, the bank were required to maintain proper records of every customer who availed a credit card facility. However, they failed to do so in the present case.Also Read | Stranger’s loan defaults ruined credit score, constable wins Rs 75,000 payoutIt noted that while State Bank of India maintained the complainant’s savings account, SBI Cards and Payment Services managed his credit card and deducted amounts from the SBI savings account. Since both entities are part of the SBI group, the commission held that they could not evade responsibility for the unauthorised deductions.Unactivated card, continuous account deductionsRupinder Singh, a resident of Yamuna Nagar, held a savings account with the State Bank of India and was issued an SBI credit card covered under a Credit Protection Plan (CPP). He claimed that he never activated the credit card or linked it to any online payment platform, i.e., Google Pay, Paytm, etc.However, beginning in February 2022, State Bank of India started debiting amounts from his savings account towards credit card dues. The complainant requested the opponents to track the said transaction, but the opponents did not give any response to the request of the complainant, and as per the account statement of the complainant, a huge amount was deducted per month from the said savings account of the complainant despite of non active of the credit card.Story continues below this adIn August 2022, he was informed of outstanding dues and discovered two transactions worth Rs 40,849.60 and Rs 18,777.50 allegedly made in Mumbai on April 29, 2022.Claiming these were unauthorised and that the bank failed to investigate despite his complaint, he approached the commission alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practices. SBI and SBI Cards denied liability, asserting that the transactions were authenticated through CVV and OTP and that the deductions were made under an auto-debit mandate accepted by the complainant.SBI claims transactions were genuineSBI contended that SBI Cards and Payment Services Ltd was a separate entity responsible for the credit card and related transactions. It argued that a credit card could only be used after generating and using a unique PIN, making unauthorised withdrawals impossible unless the complainant himself or someone with his knowledge had used the card. SBI denied any negligence or deficiency in service and sought dismissal of the complaint.SBI Cards submitted that the complainant had applied for the credit card after accepting its terms and conditions and had opted for an auto-debit mandate for payment of outstanding dues.It maintained that the disputed transactions of Rs 40,849 and Rs 18,777 were genuine, having been authenticated through the card’s CVV and a dynamic OTP sent to the complainant’s registered mobile number.Story continues below this adAccording to the company, the complainant had used the credit card for multiple transactions but failed to clear the dues, resulting in periodic auto-debits from his savings account. It further argued that the CPP issue had been taken up with the insurance company and that any liability arising from the transactions rested solely with the complainant, as the transactions could not have been completed without disclosure of confidential card details. It therefore denied any deficiency in service or unfair trade practice.No proof of card activation: OrderThe commission observed that SBI and SBI Cards failed to produce any documentary evidence showing that the complainant had ever activated the credit card by generating a PIN or used it for any transaction.Although the banks claimed the disputed transactions were authenticated through OTP and that the complainant had opted for an auto-debit mandate, they did not place on record any documents proving activation of the card, use of OTP, or execution of the auto-debit mandate. The commission held that such assertions, unsupported by documentary evidence, could not be accepted.The Commission further noted that the opposite parties also failed to produce any credit card statements or account records establishing that the complainant had carried out the disputed transactions of Rs 40,849 and Rs 18,777.Story continues below this adAlso Read | Court calls it ‘lifeline’ unblocks bank account frozen for Rs 560 ‘suspicious’ transactionIt found it inexplicable that, despite claiming an outstanding amount, SBI Cards recovered only partial amounts every month from the complainant’s savings account instead of debiting the full amount when sufficient funds were available.TakeawayThis judgment reinforces that banks cannot rely on unsupported claims to justify disputed credit card transactions. It emphasises the duty of financial institutions to maintain proper records, investigate fraud complaints promptly, and substantiate auto-debit mandates. Failure to produce documentary evidence can amount to a deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.Consumers facing similar grievances may contact the consumer helpline in their respective states (Haryana helpline: 1800-180-2087) or dial the National Consumer Helpline at 1915 for assistance.