Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 359/2019

Case between Roy.D vs Bank Of Baroda et al regarding unauthorized electronic banking transaction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Judge
Sri. ARAVIND P.
Order Date
2025-06-05
Duration
approximately-5 years 6 months
Case Closed
Thu, 06/05/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Roy.D, an account holder of Bank of Baroda, Varkala branch, filed a suit against the bank for unauthorized withdrawals amounting to ₹13,751/- from his account. The plaintiff claims that these transactions were made without his consent using a forged ATM card.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to pay ₹18,627/- with 6% interest for unauthorized withdrawals.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹18,627/- with 6% interest from the date of suit till realization.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to pay ₹18,627/- with 6% interest for unauthorized withdrawals.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The defendants failed to prove that the withdrawals were authorized and did not establish a valid defense against the plaintiff's claims.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The defendants failed to prove that the withdrawals were authorized and did not establish a valid defense against the plaintiff's claims.
Supporting Evidence
The bank can’t escape from the liability of reimbursing the amount to the plaintiff by raising lame excuses.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed as follows: 1. The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹18,627/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Seven only) from the defendants with 6% interest from the date of suit till the date of the realization.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Roy.D
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Bank Of Baroda
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Regional Manager, Bank Of Baroda
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Search Complaints Enquiry, transaction details, Advocate Notice, Postal receipts, Postal acknowledgment card, RBI Customer Protection Circular.
Defendants Documents
Copy of Statement of account, Certificate under Banker’s Book of Evidence Act.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. P. Ramachandran Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Wilson Mullesseril
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover ₹18,627/- with interest.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed as follows: The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹18,627/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Seven only) from the defendants with 6% interest from the date of suit till the date of the realization.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is also entitled to realize costs of the proceedings from the defendants.
Evidence:
Issue No.3 is found in favour of the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Copy of Search Complaints Enquiry
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used as evidence to show the complaint registered by the plaintiff with the bank.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of transaction details
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provided details of the transactions related to the plaintiff's account.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Copy of Advocate Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This was used to demonstrate the legal notice served to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Postal Receipts
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
These documents served as evidence of correspondence related to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A4 & A4(a)
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
These served to show proof of delivery of documents.
Reference:
Ext.A5 and A6
Document Type: Copy of Customer Protection – Limiting Liability of Customers in Unauthorized Electronic Banking Transactions
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This exhibit was referenced to establish regulatory framework regarding unauthorized transactions.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Copy of statement of account
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document was submitted to provide details of the account activities for the disputed period.
Reference:
Ext.B1(series)
Document Type: Certificate under section 2(A) of the Banker’s Book of Evidence Act, 1981
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This certificate provided legal validation of the bank document submitted.
Reference:
Ext.B1(b)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Roy.D vs Bank Of Baroda et al regarding unauthorized electronic banking transaction
Case Code Year
Case between Roy.D vs Bank Of Baroda et al regarding unauthorized electronic banking transaction

Quick Facts

Location
Varkala, Kerala
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Case Filed
Tue, 01/01/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Thu, 06/05/2025 - 12:00
From
Thu, 05/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between UCO Bank vs Sumesh et al regarding realization of money.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between UCO Bank (United Commercial Bank) vs Ajimol.A et al regarding education loan recovery
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between The Federal Bank Limited vs Saneesh M.Y regarding loan recovery.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank et al vs Shemi M., Mohandas regarding recovery of loan amount
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Federal Bank Ltd. vs Ananthu Satheesan et al regarding recovery of loan amount
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won