Sbi Recovery Rs 115 Senior Citizen Consumer Court

An Andhra Pradesh District Consumer Commission has rejected SBI’s plea to recover Rs 115 that was paid in excess to a 75-year-old man, while complying with an order directing it to pay Rs 45,000 to the customer.

An Andhra Pradesh District Consumer Commission has upheld its order directing SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited to pay Rs 45,000 in compensation to a 75-year-old customer, refusing to entertain the company’s bid to recover a mere Rs 115 that it claimed to have paid in excess while complying with the award.

The Kurnool District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission president Karanam Kishore Kumar and member S Nazima Kausar was hearing an execution application filed by one M Surya Prakash, who alleged that the company had failed to comply with the commission’s earlier judgment dated September 17, 2025.

“Considering the excess amount is negligible, this commission is of the considered opinion that no refund is required to be made by the complainant. The plea of the opposite party number 1 (SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited) seeking refund of excess amount is devoid of merit,” the commission said on June 5.

The dispute arose after the consumer forum had earlier directed SBI Cards to pay the complainant Rs 45,000 as compensation and Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. During execution proceedings, the company claimed it had inadvertently overpaid while complying with the order and sought a direction requiring the consumer to refund the alleged excess amount. The commission, however, found that the excess payment was only about Rs 115 and declined to order its recovery.

The consumer forum had, on September 17, 2025, partly allowed the complaint filed by Prakash and directed SBI Cards and Payments Services Limited to pay Rs 45,000 as compensation along with Rs 5,000 towards litigation costs. The commission also ordered that if the amount was not paid within 45 days, it would carry interest at 12 per cent per annum until realisation.

Claiming that the company had not complied with the order within the stipulated period, the complainant initiated execution proceedings before the commission on January 17 seeking enforcement of the award. During the proceedings, SBI Cards informed the commission that it had paid Rs 55,802.74 through a demand draft dated March 9, towards satisfaction of the decree. However, the company also filed a memo contending that it had mistakenly paid Rs 2,458 in excess and requested the commission to direct the complainant to refund the surplus amount.

Instead of accepting the company’s calculation, the commission independently worked out the amount payable under its earlier order. It noted that interest at 12 per cent per annum on the total award of Rs 50,000, comprising compensation and litigation costs from March 28, 2025, the date of institution of the complaint, until March 9, came to Rs 5,687.67.

Accordingly, the total amount payable worked out to Rs 55,687.67. Since SBI Cards had actually paid Rs 55,802.74, the commission found that the excess payment was only Rs 115.07, far lower than the company’s claim of Rs 2,458.

The ruling underscores that execution proceedings are meant to ensure compliance with consumer forum orders rather than reopen disputes over trivial accounting differences. Once the successful consumer has substantially received the amount legally due, consumer forums may decline to entertain attempts to recover negligible excess payments and instead treat the original award as fully satisfied.

Observing that two daily-wage sweepers had given their “sweat & blood” to the State Bank of India (SBI) and were unlikely to find fresh employment “in the AI era” after spending nearly three decades in menial jobs, the Orissa High Court has directed the bank to pay Rs 20 lakh each to them, instead of granting regularisation.

A division bench of Justices Krishna S Dixit and Chittaranjan Dash was hearing appeals filed by one Mayadhar Nayak and Baina Nayak against a single judge’s June 20, 2025, judgment dismissing their claims for regularisation, bonus, arrears and other service benefits after nearly 30 years of service as daily-wage sweepers at SBI’s Government Treasury Branch in Bhubaneswar.

“The Appellants, who have given their sweat & blood, cannot seek gainful employment elsewhere at their present declining age,” the court said on June 23. “In the AI (artificial intelligence) era, we are not sure that they would be able to eke out their livelihood, having spent prime of their life blood in the menial job all these years,” the court added, rejecting SBI’s offer of Rs 5 lakh as a one-time settlement.

The judges said the bank’s offer of Rs 5 lakh to each of them was “too frugal” at a time when when “bread is costlier than blood”.

Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system. Expertise Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including: Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability. Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters. Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights. Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More