BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD
F.A.No.576 OF 2012 AGAINST C.D.No.600 OF 2010 DISTRICT FORUM-I
HYDERABAD
Between:
Sampa Red Hills Apartment, Hyderabad-04
- ICICI Bank Ltd., rep. by its Manager
Bangalore Branch, ICICI Bank Towers
Ground Floor, Commissariat Road No.1
Bangalore-025 - ICICI Bank Ltd.,
Credit Card Division, ICICI Bank Towers
1-11-256, Wall Street Plaza
Respondents/opposite parties
Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondents
QUORUM:
THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER
MONDAY THE TWENTY EIGTH DAY OF JANUARY
Oral Order (As per Sri 1.The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant. She filed complaint claiming a sum of`10 lakh on the premise of loss of reputation, suffering mental agony and deficiency in service and unfair trade practice against the respondents.
2. `5 lakhs in the month of August, 2005 from the first respondent bank by keeping 18 blank
3. `5 lakh and`25,000/- towards credit card charges. The appellant decided not to continue the credit card facility as the respondents levied extra and unnecessary charges against the regulations and guidelines prescribed by RBI.
4. `93,300/- was sanctioned as loan and disbursed on 9.09.2005 through loan account bearing number LPBNG00004449816.`3,280/- each through auto debit facility commencing from 7.10.2005 to 7.09.2008. The appellant was aware of the rate of interest, tenure of
5. `1`31,100/- and since then she has been utilizing the credit facility.
6. `23,990/- as on
7. biswas@rediffmail.comanitaahuja027@yahoo.com2009 and requested the appellant to close the account by making payment of the outstanding due. The respondents prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. `93,300/- from the first respondent bank on 9.09.2005 under loan account bearing number LPBNG00004449816. `3,280/- each commencing from 7.10.2005 till 7.09.2008. The appellant was aware of the rate of interest, tenure of loan, EMIs and she executed loan agreement agreeing to pay the EMIs. The appellant obtained credit cards, primary card bearing number 4477463856438003 and add on card bearing number 4477463856438103 from the first respondent bank.
13. 14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19. In “Oriental Insurance Company Ltdthe insurance company disputed the genuineness of the documents and the
“9.The Commission noted that the specific stand of the appellant was that there was
10.Proceedings before the Commission are essentially summary in nature and adjudication of issues which involve disputed factual questions should not be adjudicated. It is to be noted that Commission accepted that insured was not a teacher. Complainant raised dispute about genuineness of the documents (i.e.
11.The Commission having accepted that there was wrong declaration of the nature of occupation of the person
12.The nature of the proceedings before the Commission as noted above, are essentially in summary nature. The factual position was required to be established by documents. Commission was required to examine whether in view of the disputed facts it would exercise the jurisdiction. The State Commission was right in its view that the complex factual position requires that the matter should be examined by an appropriate Court of Law and not by the Commission.
13.Above being the position, the Commission was not justified to deal with the matter in the manner as was done. In our view, the directions of the State Commission were more appropriate keeping in line with the nature of dispute. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed but with no order as to costs”.
20.
21.
KMK*
