ISLAMABAD: President Dr Arif Alvi has rejected the representation, filed by Soneri Bank Ltd (SBL) against the order of the Banking Mohtasib, and has made the bank responsible for making good the loss of the money to the complainant without further delay.

While upholding the orders of the Banking Mohtasib to pay an amount of Rs800,000 to the complainant, the president stated in his decision, on Saturday that the bank could not escape the liability in a case of this kind, when the commission of fraud with the account holder by its management was established and admitted.

He said that ample opportunity had been provided to the bank before the learned Banking Mohtasib to defend and controvert the claim of the complainant and even before the forum; however, the bank had failed to discharge the burden and statutory liability cast upon it under the law.

Muhammad Danish Naseem (the complainant) maintains an account with the Soneri Bank Ltd Sargodha Road Branch, Sheikhupura.

Danish opened his account on 22 October 2018 in the bank branch and requested the manager to deposit Rs2,000,000 (Rupees two million) cash in the said account.

Whereas, the manager gave him deposit slips of Rs500,000, Rs900,000, and Rs600,000, respectively. Despite insistence of the account holder for issuing one deposit slip of amount, ie, Rs2 million, the bank manager issued three deposit slips saying that it was to overcome the restrictions of the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP).

Later, the account holder wanted to draw money from his account but there was no sufficient balance in his account. He lodged a complaint with the bank's authorities but his grievance was not addressed.

Although, the complainant possessed valid deposit slips admittedly issued by the ex-manager bearing his genuine signature and branch stamp affixed thereon, which validated customer claim to the extent that the bank had not accounted for amounts of Rs2,000,000 in his account.

Furthermore, the bank had admitted during the proceedings before the Banking Mohtasib that the receipts in possession of the customers bore signatures of the bank's ex-manager. Despite all these proofs, the complainant was compelled to run from pillar to post and no relief was provided to him. Feeling aggrieved, Danish Naseem approached the Banking Mohtasib for his grievance.

The Banking Mohtasib, under Section 82 D of the BCO read with Section 9 of the Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act, 2013 (No XIV of 2013), advised the bank to forthwith make good the loss by crediting the account of the complainant with a sum of Rs800,000 in pursuance of the findings.

While rejecting representation of the bank, the president has noted that it is a case of wrongdoing and maladministration by the bank officials and it is, therefore, responsible to make good the loss of the complainant.

He further stated that the ambit and extent of jurisdiction of Banking Mohtasib was spelt out under Section 82A (3)(a)(e), Section 82B(4)(5) and Section 82F of the Banking Companies Ordinance, 1962.

The cumulative reading and perusal of these provisions of law undoubtedly leads to the conclusion that the Banking Mohtasib is to inquire into the complainants about banking malpractices, maladministration, wrong doings, the fraudulent transactions, the corrupt and mala fide practices by the bank officials and pass appropriate orders on conclusion of inquiry.

These powers of the Banking Mohtasib when considered in context with Section 18 and 24 of the Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reforms Act, 2013, further show that in matters falling within the jurisdiction of the Banking Mohtasib, stated the decision.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2021