UCO Bank ordered to pay Rs 10 Lakh to customer for Jewellery Loss from Bank Locker

Key Takeaways:

1. UCO Bank was ordered to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to a customer whose locker was looted due to a burglary at the bank’s Civil Lines, Allahabad branch.

2. The NCDRC found the bank responsible for not taking appropriate measures to ensure the safety of goods kept in the lockers by customers, leading to a clear case of deficiency in service regarding the security and safety system in the bank.

3. The bank argued that it was not liable for any loss or damage to the contents of the locker, but the NCDRC found the bank to be deficient in service in respect of lapses in the due care and attention to the safety and security of the lockers.

4. The compensation amount was lowered from Rs 20 lakh, as awarded by the State Consumer Commission, to Rs 10 lakh by the NCDRC, deeming it just and reasonable.

The case involving UCO Bank and the customer who maintained a bank locker in the bank’s Civil Lines, Allahabad branch resulted in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) ordering UCO Bank to pay Rs 10 lakh as compensation to the victim whose locker was looted. The NCDRC found the bank responsible for not taking appropriate measures to ensure the safety of goods kept in the lockers by customers, leading to a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the bank regarding the security and safety system in the bank.

The complainants alleged that a burglary took place in the Civil Lines Branch of UCO Bank, Allahabad, during which the burglars succeeded in breaking open the door of the strong room and cutting the steel lockers with the help of gas cylinders and gas cutters, looting all the gold ornaments, jewelry, and valuables, including cash, kept in the locker. Furthermore, it was alleged that even after the burglary, the entire bank premises, including the locker room, were left open, unnoticed, and unguarded until the morning of May 1, 2018. The complainants also claimed that the bank had charged locker rent even when the locker was not in use.

UCO Bank argued that according to the bank locker terms and conditions, the bank is not liable for any loss or damage to the contents of the locker arising from any cause or event over which it is physically impossible for the bank to have any control. However, the NCDRC found that the bank was deficient in service in respect of lapses in the due care and attention to the safety and security of the lockers.

The NCDRC order mentioned that the branch was left unattended after business hours, and no security guard was deployed. It also stated that the security system alarm was outdated, and there was no evidence with regard to the maintenance of the security system or daily checks of the alarm system by the manager. When the complainants pointed out the deficiencies in UCO Bank’s safety and security systems, the bank did not provide any actual implementation of the same, leading to a clear case of deficiency in service on the part of the bank regarding security and safety system in the bank.

The complainants had initially filed a case before the State Consumer Commission against the deficiency of service of UCO Bank, which ordered a compensation of Rs 20 lakh. UCO Bank then filed an appeal against the order before NCDRC, which subsequently lowered the compensation amount to Rs 10 lakh, stating that the compensation of Rs 20 lakh as awarded by the State Commission was on the higher side.

In conclusion, UCO Bank was directed to pay compensation because the NCDRC found the bank to be deficient in service regarding lapses in the due care and attention to the safety and security of the lockers, as well as the outdated security system and lack of evidence with regard to the maintenance of the security system. The compensation of Rs 10 lakh was deemed just and reasonable by the NCDRC.

FAQ:

Q1: Why was UCO Bank directed to pay compensation?

A1: UCO Bank was directed to pay compensation because the NCDRC found the bank to be deficient in service regarding lapses in the due care and attention to the safety and security of the lockers, as well as the outdated security system and lack of evidence with regard to the maintenance of the security system.

Q2: What was the compensation amount awarded to the customer?

A2: The NCDRC ordered UCO Bank to pay Rs 10 lakh as compensation to the victim whose locker was looted due to a burglary at the bank’s Civil Lines, Allahabad branch.