Core Point - The case revolves around Smt Sharma, who faced unjust bounce charges from SBI despite maintaining sufficient funds in her account, leading to a ruling in her favor by the Delhi State Consumer Commission [18][19]. Group 1: Background of the Case - Smt Sharma took a car loan of Rs 2.6 lakh from HDFC Bank on April 15, 2008, and authorized SBI to deduct her monthly EMI of Rs 7,054 through ECS from her savings account [3][4]. - A total of 11 EMI payments bounced, resulting in charges of Rs 4,400, with three due to insufficient funds and eight labeled as "not valid" [5][18]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings - After SBI declined to refund the bounce charges, Sharma filed a complaint with the district consumer commission in 2010, which was dismissed, prompting her to escalate the matter to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) [2][7]. - The NCDRC remanded the case back to the Delhi State Consumer Commission, which ultimately ruled in favor of Sharma on October 9, 2025 [18][19]. Group 3: Findings of the Delhi State Consumer Commission - The Commission found that SBI's argument regarding incorrect ECS mandate details was implausible, as some EMIs were successfully cleared under the same mandate [12][16]. - SBI failed to provide evidence to support its claims of insufficient funds or incorrect ECS details, leading to a conclusion of deficiency in service on SBI's part [11][14][16]. Group 4: Compensation Awarded - The Delhi State Consumer Commission ordered SBI to pay Rs 1.7 lakh to Sharma, which includes Rs 1.5 lakh for mental agony and Rs 20,000 for litigation costs, to be paid within three months [19].