Archive · 9 Oct 2026
Delhi Commission Upholds Refund for Unauthorized SBI Account Withdrawals
Shakuntala Mehtani said money was taken from two of her bank accounts without her permission.
She said her former accountant changed the phone number and email linked to the accounts.
SBI argued that the transactions were made through internet banking and that alerts were sent to the registered phone number.
The commission said those alerts did not prove that Mehtani had approved the transactions.
It also said SBI had not shown paperwork proving she agreed to the changes.
The commission upheld an order requiring SBI to return Rs 42.92 lakh and pay compensation.
The bank must also pay interest on the money.
SBI’s appeal was dismissed.
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed SBI’s appeal against a refund order.
The case involved Rs 42.92 lakh withdrawn from Shakuntala Mehtani’s savings and overdraft accounts in July 2021.
Mehtani alleged her former accountant changed her registered contact details and enabled transactions without her consent.
The commission said SBI produced no documentation showing she authorized the contact-detail change or internet-banking upgrade.
SBI must refund Rs 42.92 lakh with 7% annual interest and pay Rs 1 lakh compensation; interest rises to 9% if the order is not complied with within three months.
- Who
- Shakuntala Mehtani and the State Bank of India; the appeal was heard by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
- What
- The commission dismissed SBI’s appeal and upheld an order to refund Rs 42.92 lakh with interest and pay Rs 1 lakh compensation.
- When
- The disputed withdrawals occurred in July 2021; the commission issued its decision on October 8, with no year specified in the article.
- Where
- Delhi, involving SBI accounts and the bank’s Nehru Place branch.
- Why
- The commission found SBI had not produced documents establishing Mehtani’s consent to changes in her registered mobile number or internet-banking facility.
Mehtani’s position
SBI’s position
Authorization for account changes and transactions
Mehtani’s position
Mehtani alleged she did not authorize the withdrawals and that her former accountant changed her contact details with bank employees’ assistance.
SBI’s position
SBI argued that the transactions were carried out by her former accountant, that she had used internet banking since 2018, and that a customer mandate was required to change the registered number.
Evidence of consent and bank responsibility
Mehtani’s position
The commission found SBI had not produced documents showing Mehtani consented to changing her registered number or upgrading her internet-banking access.
SBI’s position
SBI denied service deficiency, said its Fraud Monitoring Cell found no official connivance, and relied on transaction alerts sent to the registered number.
- Amount disputed
- Rs 42.92 lakh
- Savings account withdrawals
- Approximately Rs 3.33 lakh
- Overdraft account withdrawals
- Approximately Rs 39.59 lakh
- Interest ordered
- 7% per annum from the dates of the respective transactions
- Compensation
- Rs 1 lakh
- Higher interest if order is not met
- 9% per annum until realisation if SBI fails to comply within three months
- Appeal outcome
- SBI’s appeal was dismissed without an order as to costs