Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

12. It is argued that the SBI has no role to play in the issue since the petitioner's representative himself produced two letters, one of which was acted upon and as the destination bank failed to comply with its duties by matching the name and the number of the destination account.

13. Learned counsel for the RBI submits that the Ombudsman is empowered only to resolve non-adversarial issues. In support of such proposition, learned counsel relies on Durga Hotel Complex Vs. RBI and Others, reported at (2007) 5 SCC 120.

28. Starting with the role of RBI, learned counsel for the RBI has placed the Reserve Bank of India - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021.

29. The role of the Ombudsman as set out in the said Scheme is primarily non-adversarial, as rightly indicated by the RBI.

30. In fact, Clause 14 of the Ombudsman Scheme of 2021 cited by the RBI provides that the Ombudsman shall endeavour to promote settlement of a complaint by agreement between the complainant and the Regulated Entity through facilitation or conciliation or mediation. Sub-clause (6) of Clause 14 provides that in case the complaint is not resolved through facilitation, such action as may be considered appropriate, including a meeting of the complainant with the officials of the Regulated Entity for resolution of the complaint by conciliation or mediation may be initiated. Clause 10(2)(b)(ii) provides that a complaint under the Scheme shall not lie unless the complaint is not in respect of the same cause of action which is already pending before any court, Tribunal or arbitrator or any other forum or authority.

32. On the second instance, the Ombudsman observed that it would not entertain the complaint under Clause 10(2)(b)(i) which provides that the complaint will not be entertained if pending before an Ombudsman or settled or dealt with on merits by an Ombudsman, whether or not received from the same complainant or along with one or more complainants or one or more of the parties concerned.

33. The RBI has rightly contended that it does not have the mechanism of a full-fledged investigating authority and exercises such powers through the Ombudsman primarily on a premise of arbitration, conciliation and/or mediation. Adversarial proceedings cannot be decided by the Ombudsman, as also held in Durga Hotel Complex (supra), cited by the petitioner. The Supreme Court, in the said case, clearly observed that the Ombudsman, at best, is an authority or Tribunal of limited jurisdiction constituted under the Scheme and could not proceed with a complaint once deprived of its jurisdiction. A complaint goes out of his purview when the subject-matter is taken to a court, arbitrator, tribunal or forum. Conceptually, the Supreme Court held, an Ombudsman is only a non-adversarial adjudicator of disputes. Borrowing the same principle in the present case, the RBI cannot have any role to play and the petitioner's prayer for an involvement and steps by the RBI cannot be entertained.