Complaint Timeline, Award Limits and the Parallel Forum
Meera Nair holds a savings account at a branch in Kochi. On 5 January 2025 she noticed a debit of Rs 47,000 she had not authorised; the money had left her account in two transactions on 3 and 4 January. She wrote to the branch by email on 6 January 2025. The branch investigated and on 20 January 2025 replied in writing rejecting her claim on the ground that she had shared an OTP. She denies ever receiving an OTP and says the bank has produced no OTP log. On 5 February 2025 she also filed a consumer complaint in the district consumer commission on the same subject, and on 20 February 2025 she wants to file a complaint with the RBI Ombudsman. She asks for Rs 47,000 as the loss, Rs 2,00,000 for mental agony, and Rs 5,000 for the lawyer's letter, and wants to know whether any fee is payable.
1. Can she file with the RBI Ombudsman on 20 February 2025, and what is the outer time limit?
Read the worked answer
Step 1 - exhaust the bank route. Under the RBI Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021, a complainant must first approach the bank. The bank then has 30 days to reply.
Step 2 - apply the dates. She wrote on 6 January 2025 and the bank replied on 20 January 2025, well inside 30 days and with a rejection. The cause of action therefore arose on 20 January 2025; she need not wait for the 30 days to run out, because a reply has already been received.
Step 3 - check the filing window. The complaint must be filed within one year of receiving the bank's reply. Counting from 20 January 2025, the outer limit is 20 January 2026 (assuming the reply was received the same day). A filing on 20 February 2025 is comfortably within time.
Step 4 - fee. There is no fee for filing with the Ombudsman; any demand for a filing fee would itself be a ground for complaint.
Caveat for the candidate: the one-year clock runs from receipt of the reply, not from the date of the fraudulent debit, so do not anchor the calculation on 3 January 2025.
2. Assess her three money claims against the Ombudsman's award powers.
Read the worked answer
Claim 1 - Rs 47,000, the amount in dispute. This is the value of the claim and is well within the Ombudsman's ceiling (an award may direct the bank to pay up to Rs 20 lakh). It is admissible if she establishes the transaction was unauthorised; the bank's assertion that she shared an OTP is exactly the fact the Ombudsman would examine, and the missing OTP log cuts against the bank because the burden of proving customer negligence lies with it.
Claim 2 - Rs 2,00,000 for mental agony. Compensation for loss of time, expenses incurred and harassment or mental anguish is capped at Rs 1 lakh, so the full Rs 2 lakh cannot be granted. She can at most be awarded Rs 1 lakh under this head, and only if she shows actual harassment or delay - a rejection of a claim, by itself, is not harassment.
Claim 3 - Rs 5,000 lawyer's letter. This is an expense, so it belongs under the same Rs 1 lakh compensation head as claim 2. Claims 2 and 3 are added together to test the Rs 1 lakh cap, not assessed separately.
Practical answer: maximum realistic recovery is Rs 47,000 at full proof plus compensation up to Rs 1 lakh in total for expense and harassment, not Rs 2.52 lakh.
3. Does the consumer complaint filed on 5 February 2025 affect the Ombudsman complaint? Advise her.
Read the worked answer
Rule. The Ombudsman cannot entertain a complaint on a matter that is already pending before a court, tribunal or consumer commission, or that has already been decided by one. The scheme channels disputes to one forum at a time; it does not allow a second, parallel attempt.
Application. Her consumer complaint filed on 5 February 2025 on the same subject is pending when she proposes to file on 20 February 2025. On these facts the Ombudsman complaint would be not maintainable as it stands, not because the Ombudsman has no power over the bank, but because the same dispute is already before another forum.
Advice. She must choose. Two workable routes: (a) withdraw the consumer complaint and then file with the Ombudsman within the one-year window, or (b) continue in the consumer commission and drop the Ombudsman plan. Doing nothing and filing both is the worst option - it risks the Ombudsman rejecting the complaint and gives the bank an easy preliminary objection in both forums.
Note the difference: the bar is on pending proceedings. If the consumer complaint had been dismissed or withdrawn before she filed, the Ombudsman complaint could be entertained, provided the one-year limit from 20 January 2025 is still met.