DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
SOUTH 24 – PARGANAS ,
AMANTRAN BAZAR, BARUIPUR, KOLKATA-700 0144
C.C. CASE NO. _161_ OF ___2016_
DATE OF FILING : 23.12.2016 DATE OF PASSING JUDGEMENT:21.11.2017
Present : President :
Member(s) : Jhunu Prasad & Subrata Sarker
COMPLAINANT : Sital Chandra Das, Proprietor of Orient Engineering Works, Ghosh Para, P.O Shyampur, P.S Maheshtala, Opp. Adarsha Bayam Samiti Club, 24 Parganas South.
-VERSUS -
O.P/O.Ps : 1. Branch Manager, Central Bank of India (Branch Code-01984), Paikpara Branch, Shyampur Bazar, BBT Road, P.S + P.O-Shyampur, South 24-Parganas, Kolkata – 137.
2. Central Bank of India, Registered Corporate office at Chander Mukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai -400021.
___________________________________________________________________
J U D G E M E N T
Jhunu Prasad, Lady Member
The door of this Forum has been knocked by the complainant for redressal arising out of the consumer dispute as per the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
In diminutive, the case of the complaint is that, the complainant was using a credit card being No. 4687720083477005 issued by the Central Bank of India for a long time. But somehow the said credit card was lost. The complainant lodged GDE before Maheshtala P.S. and informed the same to the O.P No.1 and requested to issue a fresh credit card in favour of the complainant. The complainant submitted all necessary documents to get the new credit card.
Thereafter the O.Ps issued one fresh credit card in favour of the complainant being No. 4687720043477013 with new PIN number. But, at the time of using the said card and PIN No. to purchase goods, it showed that the card is invalid and the PIN No. was wrong.
Thereafter the complainant visited the O.P No.1 and informed the problem faced by the complainant and the O.P No. 1 assured that the request for fresh new PIN No. of the complainant has been forwarded on urgent basis. It was also informed that when the fresh new PIN issued, the earlier PIN would be deactivated.
The complainant stated that the PIN is generated randomly by the system and even the bank officials have no clue of the same and the PIN is issued against a specific card.
The complainant also stated that the PIN issued against the new card did not match causing severe loss to business and good will of the complainant.
Thereafter the complainant had approached before the Assistant Director, C.A & F.B.P., South 24 Parganas and lodged a complaint, but the problem was not solved.
Having no other alternative the complainant filed this instant complaint for getting relief.
Issued notices upon the Opposite Parties.
After receiving the notices the Opposite Parties appeared by way of filing written statement to controvert their case.
In the written version, filed by the O.P stated that this complaint is vexatious, harassing, misconceived of facts and an abuse of process of law and denying the contentions and all material allegations made by the complainant in the petition of complaint and stating, inter alia, that the complainant has no cause of action and the complaint is not maintainable and the instant complaint should be treated as vexatious complaint.
The OP. stated that according to the complaint petition the complainant was using a credit card, being No. 4687720083477705, it means he is still continuing with the same old credit card mentioned above, but in the complaint petition he himself accepted that he has received the new credit card being No. 4687720083477013 in the month of January 2016.
The OP. also stated that after receiving the hard copy of the mail on 6th February 2016 by the complainant, the O.P No. 1 replied that the reasons behind the delay for sending the PIN No. caused due to postal delay, but the complainant received the PIN No. on 4.2.2016. After receiving the new credit card, the complainant became impatience and repeatedly enquired the branch of O.P No.1 for issuance of PIN No.
Accordingly the O.P No.1 immediately forwarded a request for issuance of new PIN. No. to Aspire Card Dept. at Mumbai and Aspire Card Dept. without having knowledge of the fact that the complainant’s PIN. No. has already generated and sent by the Aspire Card Dept. through post, which was stuck with postal dept. and the same was received by the complainant on 4.2.2016.
But the Aspire Card Dept. as per request of the bank issued new PIN No. after deactivated the old one and sent the same to the bank which the bank received on 4.2.2016 in the evening and on the next day i.e. on 5.2.2016 the same was delivered to the complainant.
The O.P No.1, bank on 6.2.2016 intimated the complainant about activation of new PIN No. and deactivation of the old one, but the complainant tried to purchase goods using the old PIN No. which was deactivated before transaction.
The Opposite Party also stated that the complainant have no prima facie case in his favour, just to harass the Opposite Parties intentionally filed this frivolous allegations and ulterior motive and the as such same should be dismissed with cost.
Point for Decision:-
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for?
Decision with Reasons:-
At the time of argument both parties filed evidence in chief, questionnaires, reply and BNA to support of their claim.
All points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of argument and brevity.
We have carefully considered and scrutinized the submission made before us by the Ld. Advocate for the complainant and also the Ld. Advocate for the O.P No.1 and 2.
On overall evaluation of the argument advanced by the Ld. Advocates of the contested parties, and on critical appreciation of the case record, it is clearly evident that admittedly the complainant visited the bank for issuing a fresh credit card in his favour after lost his old credit card being no 4687720083477005. Accordingly the O.P bank issued a new credit card in favour of the complainant being No. 4687720083477013.
Fact remains that, after receiving the new credit card, the complainant became impatient repeatedly visited the branch of O.P No.1 and enquired for issuing PIN. Immediately the O.P No.1 forwarded a requested for issuance of new PIN to Aspire card Dept. at Mumbai and Aspire Card Dept. without having knowledge of the fact that the complainant’s PIN No. has already generated and sent by the Aspire Card Dept. through post, which was stuck with postal dept. and the same was received by the complainant on 4.2.2016.
Manifestly, it is found from the record and documents, that PIN was issued and sent to the complainant through postal service within time, but due to delay by postal department such inconvenience cause to the complainant for which the O.Ps can’t be held responsible. At the instance of the complainant the O.P No.1 makes necessary arrangement for new PIN which has been received by the O.P No.1 on 04.02.2016.
The complainant after receipt of old PIN on 04.02.2016 should have intimated the same to the O.P No.1, bank at the time of receiving the new PIN on 05.02.2016.
Moreover, the record reveals that the reasons behind the delay for sending the PIN No. caused due to postal delay, but the complainant did not add the postal department as necessary party at the time of filing the complaint or even after receiving written version from the O.Ps.
So, it is crystal clear from the record that, there is no deficiency on the part of the O.P NO.1, bank. Incident occurred due to postal delay.
In light of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complainant did not successfully proved his case and therefore, is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for and consequently the points for determination are decided in negative.
In the result, we proceed to pass
ORDER
That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the Opposite Parties without any cost.
Let the copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
Member Presiding Member
Dictated and corrected by me
Member
The judgment in separate sheet is ready and is delivered in open Forum. As it is ,
ORDER
That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the Opposite Parties without any cost.
Let the copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost when applied for.
Member Presiding Member
