Madras High Court
Constitution of India, 1949-Article 226-Banking Regulations Act, 1949-Section 35-A-Writ jurisdiction-
Online fraud via Paytm /Unauthorized transaction-Third party violation-Paytm has been granted with a license by the RBI to carry on payment bank business-The people use payment banks like Paytm, Google Pay, Amazon Pay, etc. they may still be impacted by third-party violations or fraudulent activity-Paytm was required to prove customer liability in cases of unauthorized electronic payment transactions-The RBI guidelines are customer-friendly, and if the customer happens to report fraudulent transactions within 3 days of the occurrence, as per RBI guidelines, there is ‘zero liability’ fixed on the customer-If the PPI issuer (Paytm etc.) is unable to resolve the complaint and determine the customer’s liability within 90 days, the amount as prescribed under RBI guidelines shall be paid to the customer irrespective of whether the negligence is on the part of the customer or otherwise.