Read Time: 11 minutes
The Top Court while hearing an appeal against judgment of NCDRC dated 18.12.2008, laid down principles to be adhered by banks operating locker facilities and further observed, “Banks as custodians of public property cannot leave the customers in the lurch merely by claiming ignorance of the contents of the lockers.”
A Division Bench of Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Vineet Saran, directing RBI to issue suitable rules concerning locker facility in banks, held, “… the banks cannot wash off their hands and claim that they bear no liability towards their customers for the operation of the locker. The very purpose for which the customer avails of the locker hiring facility is so that they may rest assured that their assets are being properly taken care of. Such actions of the banks would not only violate the relevant provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, but also damage investor confidence and harm our reputation as an emerging economy.”
Issue
Observation
Relief with respect to the contents of the locker
Court granted liberty to file a suit before the Civil Court proving that the contents of locker were in the custody of bank, as the said fact is disputed as per the findings of the Consumer Forum.
Separate Duty of Care of the Bank with regard to Locker Management
Court observed that the imposition of liability upon the Bank in the instant case would depend on the Trial in Civil Court. However, this cannot leave the appellant without any remedy. “Banks as service providers under the earlier Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and the newly enacted Act of 2019, owe a separate duty of care to exercise due diligence in maintaining and operating their locker or safety deposit systems. This includes ensuring the proper functioning of the locker system, guarding against unauthorized access and providing appropriate safeguards against theft and robbery. This duty of care is to be exercised irrespective of the application of laws of bailment or any other legal liability regime to the contents of the locker”, the bench said.
Guidelines issued:
Decision
Court imposed costs of Rs 500000 on the Bank, directing it to be paid as a compensation to the Appellant from the salary of the erring officers.
As a concluding remark, the Court added that, As we are moving towards a technologically advanced era, where there are chances of miscreants to manipulate and gain access wrongfully, customers being completely left at the mercy of the banks as a more resourceful party for protection of assets, Banks cannot wash of their hands and claim that they bear no liability towards their customers for the operation of the locker.
Case Title: Amitabh Dasgupta v. United Bank of India & Ors. | CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3966 of 2010.
Access Copy of Judgment
Please Login or Register