BEFORE THE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT  HYDERABAD.

F.A.No.152 OF 2010  AGAINST  C.C. 308 OF 2008, DISTRICT FORUM-II VISAKHAPATNAM

Between:

Abhijit S Anand

S/o S.S.Anand, aged 41 years,

Flat No.501, Sandeep Apartments

57B Kirlampuri Layout,
Visakhapatnam-28

                                                        Appellant/complainant

        A N D

1.     ICICI Bank Ltd.,

        PO Box No.20, Banjara Hills

        Hyderabad rep. by its Branch Manager

2.     ICICI Bank Ltd., 

        RAPG Credit Card Division,

        103A First Floor, Siripuram Fort

        CBM Compound, Viskahapatnam-005

        Rep. by its Manager,

                                                                Respondents/opposite parties

Counsel for the  Appellant :                   Sri K.A.Narasimham

Counsel for the  Respondent:                Sri P.Ramachandran

QUORUM:   SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER

AND

SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER

                            TUESDAY THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH

TWO THOUSAND TWELVE

Oral Order (As per Sri R.Lakshminarasimha Rao, Hon’ble Member)

                                        ***

1.             The unsuccessful complainant is the appellant.

2.             He has filed the complaint seeking compensation of `1,00,000/- alleging deficiency in service to the respondent bank and also sought for direction to the bank to close his account as also for payment of incidental and consequential costs.

3.             The appellant was issued credit card No.4477470099945009 by the respondent bank.  The appellant in view of his employment was away from Visakhapatnam and on his behalf his father used to make payment in respect of the credit card account.  The appellant intended to settle his credit card account and on his behalf his father approached the manager of the respondent bank Credit Card Division in the month of December 2006 and he was informed that since the amount paid to the bank was in excess of the actual amount, it was suggested to the manager on 22.12.2006 to arrive at a figure for settlement of the account.

4.             The manager of the respondent bank agreed to adjust the balance outstanding amount and waive of any balance at the time of closure of the account.   The appellant paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- through cheque dated 26.4.2007.  As there was no settlement of account, the appellant’s father addressed letter dated 20.7.2007 to the Chief Manager of the Respondent bank with a request for settlement of the account.  The respondent bank by its reply dated 27.7.2007 requested the appellant’s father to send the letter containing the appellant’s signature whereon the appellant addressed letter dated 1.8.2007 with his signature and the respondent bank issued letter dated 8.8.2007 requesting the appellant to meet its officer Mr.Srikanth.  The appellant’s father addressed another letter dated 22.8.2007 and the appellant had sent letter dated 7.9.2007 requesting for settlement of the account. 

5.             The respondent bank had sent conciliation notice asking the appellant to come to its office and settle the account.  The appellant’s father had furnished the respondent bank at the conciliation meeting, the copies of the correspondence. 

6.             The claim was resisted on behalf of the respondent bank on the premise that the card statement with endorsement of Mr.Chandrasekhar has no concern with the respondent bank.  No person is authorized to close the credit card account of any customer except the respondent bank and the endorsement on the statement of account is not binding on the respondent bank.  The appellant is still due to clear the credit card account and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent bank.

        The appellant has filed his affidavit and the documents Exs.A1 to A24 and Ex.MO1.  On behalf of the respondent bank, its Branch Manager has filed his affidavit and Ex.B1. 

        The District Forum has dismissed the complaint on the premise that there cannot be any deficiency in service on the part of the respondent bank for the reason that except the respondent bank no any person is authorized to close the credit card account of the appellant and the endorsement said to have been made by the Chandrasekhar does not bind the respondent bank in any manner whatsoever.

        Feeling aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, the complainant has filed the appeal contending that the District Forum has not considered the evidence in correct perspective and that the appellant has paid Rs.10,000/- through cheque bearing No.284097 towards full and final settlement of his credit card account. 

        The counsel for the respondent bank has filed written submissions.

        The points for consideration are:

1)     Whether the appellant has paid the outstanding dues for settlement of his credit card account?

2)     Whether the respondent bank has rendered deficiency service by issuing mothly statement in respect of the credit card account of the appellant?

        3)     To what relief?

        POINTS NO.1 AND 2 The admitted facts are that the appellant is the customer of the respondent bank and he was issued with the credit card No. 4477470099945009.  it is also not disputed that the appellant was away from Visakhapatnam in view of his employment and his father used to make payment in respect of the dues under the credit card account of the appellant.  The respondent bank has disputed the statement of the appellant that the appellant stopped using the credit card since the month of August 2006 and the appellant’s father approaching on behalf of the appellant the respondent bank for settlement of the credit card account.   The respondent bank has also disputed excess payment by the appellant in respect of the credit card account.

        In the month of November 2007 the respondent bank has sent conciliation notice through its advocate to the appellant.  The dispute between the parties is in regard to the payment of the outstanding due in respect of the credit card account.  The appellant contends that he has paid the amount of Rs.10,000/- on 26.4.2007 towards full and final settlement of the account whereas the respondent bank contends that the appellant has not paid the amount due and the conciliation proceedings initiated by it in this regard have not been fructified. 

        In regard to the proceedings for settlement of the account, the appellant has relied upon the endorsement on the statement of account made by one Chandrasekhar stating that Chandrasekhar an employee of the respondent bank and at his request towards full and final settlement of the account, the appellant has paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- which was acknowledged by Chandrasekhar.  The respondent bank has denied any concern with Chandrasekhar or his endorsement on statement of account.  In this regard the respondent bank had relied upon the terms and condtions of the credit card which clearly would go to show that the respondent bank alone is entitled to close the statement of account and not any of its employee irrespective of his designation.  It is also contendedo n behalf of the respondent bank unless entire amount due in respect of the account is paid by the card holder, the credit card account cannot be closed.

        It is an undenied fact that as per the statement of the credit card account, the appellants has not cleared the dues and he has not established the authenticity of the endorsement made by one Chandrasekhar to make the endorsement in the statement of account.  The appellant has not surrendered the credit card.  As per the terms and conditions of the credit card account as relied upon by the respondent bank, the appellant is bound to clear off the dues and surrendered the credit card in order to seek for closure of the credit card account.

        The appellant has failed to establish that he has paid the entire amount of Rs.1,01,160/- as on 26.1.2011 and he has also not proved the factum of his making payment to the respondent bank as also his request for closure of the account on the premise that he paid the amount of Rs.10,000/- towards full and final settlement of the account.  In any view of the matter, the appellant has failed to establish his claim.  We do not see any reason or infirmity the findings returned by the District forum in regard to the failure of the appellant relating to the payment of entire due under the credit card statement.  As such the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

        In the result the appeal is dismissed confirming the order of the District forum.  There shall be no order as to costs.

                                                                        MEMBER

                                                                        MEMBER

                                                                     Dt.13.3.2012

KMK*