IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT S I L I G U R I.
CONSUMER CASE NO. : 74/S/2013. DATED : 24.02.2016.
BEFORE PRESIDENT : SRI BISWANATH DE,
President, D.C.D.R.F., Siliguri.
MEMBER : SMT. PRATITI BHATTACHARYYA.
COMPLAINANT : SRI DHIREN SAHA,
S/O Birendranath Saha,
Hindu by faith, Businessman by occupation,
residing at Mandira, 60, Netaji Sarani,
Hyderpara, P.O.- Rabindra Sarani,
P.S.- Bhaktinagar, Dist.- Darjeeling,
PIN – 734 006.
OPs 1. : ICICI BANK LTD.,
A Company within the meaning of the
Companies Act, 1956, having its registered
office at Landmark, Race Course Circle,
Vadodara – 390 007.
[
- : ICICI BANK LTD.,
Corporate office : ICICI Bank Towers,
Bandra-Kurla Complex,
Mumbai – 400 051.
- : BTRANCH MANAGER,
ICICI Bank Limited, 2nd Mile,
Sevoke Road, P.O.- Siliguri,
P.S.- Bhaktinagar, Dist- Jalpaiguri.
- : STORE MANAGER,
City Style, 2nd Mile, Sevoke Road,
Beside Bajaj Showroom, P.O.- Siliguri,
P.S.- Bhaktinagar, Dist- Jalpaiguri.
- : HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE
CORPORATION LTD.,
HDFC BANK LTD.,
A company within the meaning of the
Companies Act, 1956 having its registered
office at Ramon House,
169, Backbay Reclamation, H.T. Parekh
Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 020.
- : BRANCH MANAGER,
HDFC Bank Limited,
Panitanki More, Sevoke Road,
P.O. & P.S.- Siliguri,
Dist- Darjeeling, Pin – 734 001.
-:2:-
FOR THE COMPLAINANT : Sri Avrojyoti Das, Adv.
FOR THE OP Nos. 1, 2 & 3. : Sri Tapes Chandra Bhattacherjee, advocate.
FOR THE OP No. 4. : Sri Pintu Ghosh, advocate.
FOR THE OP Nos. 5 & 6. : Sri Bijoy Saha, advocate.
J U D G E M E N T
Sri Biswanath De, Ld. President.
The complainant’s case in brief is that in the year 2008, the agents of OP No.1 had approached him for providing credit card, and the complainant was supplied with a credit card of the bank in February, 2008. On 22.06.2008 the complainant with members of his family went to the store of OP No.4 to make some purchases, and he gave the credit card issued by OP No.1 to OP No.4, who swiped the card in their merchant machine to obtain the said sum of Rs.1,677/-, but OP No.4 informed the complainant that the card could not be accessed. OP No.5 had also issued a credit card to the complainant, and the complainant gave the said card to OP No.4, who swiped it, and informed that payment had been successfully received. The complainant paid the due of Rs.1,677/- to OP No.5 on 10.07.2008 through its branch office i.e., the OP No.6, and the said payment was recovered in the monthly statement by the OP No.5. The complainant was startled to get the monthly statement dated 09.07.2008 issued by OP No.1 showing due of Rs.1,576/-, and it was stated that an amount of Rs.1,677/- was charged against the payment made to OP No.4 by OP No.1 on account of purchase made by the complainant on 22.06.2008. The complainant protested with OP No.4 that he had been charged twice for the said bill, and OP No.4 informed him verbally that payment was made by OP No.5, and no payment was made by OP No.1. When the complainant approached OP No.1 about the matter, he was informed that payment was made to OP No.4 on account of the said transaction. The complainant claims that the OP Nos.1 to 4 failed to redress the grievance put forward by him, and he was charged twice for the same transaction, and OP No.4 cheated him in connivance with other OPs. The complainant submits that the recovery agents of OP No.1 have
-:3:-
threatened him with dire consequence, and asked him to pay the “outstanding amount”, and he protested that he is not liable to make any further payment. The complainant claims that on 11.04.2013 he obtained a print out of the account statement from the website of OP No.1, and he was astounded to see that the total amount due for the concerned credit card was Rs.3,530.19/-, and he insists that he never made any purchase using the credit card of OP No.1. The complainant thus filed this case praying that the OP No.1 be directed to withdraw its unfounded account statement for the credit card, and thereby to show the due amount as nil, and for a direction of OP Nos.5 and 6 to confirm payment of Rs.1,667/- by the complainant, and he prays for some other reliefs as well.
The PO Nos.1, 2 & 3 have filed written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations raised by the complainant. These OPs stated that the disputed transaction as alleged in the complaint is a matter between the complainant and the OP No.4 and must be settled by the customer with the OP No.4. The answering OPs are not liable in any manner. These OPs further stated that as the disputed amount is credited to the account of OP No.4, so, OP No.4 is liable to refund the same.
OP No.4 appeared and filed written version denying inter-alia all the material allegations raised by the complainant. OP No.4 submitted that statement made in paragraph 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 & 12 of the petitions are more or less correct and are admitted by the OP. It is correct that complainant purchased goods from the shop where the OP No.4 is an employee and payment was made through credit card for a total amount of Rs.1,677/- only for a single transaction. No other payment for the same amount was received for Rs.1,677/- on 22.06.2008. The complainant never came to this OP No.4 regarding any allegation and OP Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 are not aware about the fact and have no commands to make over the same. Accordingly, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.
-:4:-
Points for decision
1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs ?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?
To prove the case the complainant has field the following documents :-
1. Copy of the merchant machine slip (customer copy) as supplied by the OP No.4 dated 22.06.2008 showing transaction of Rs.1677/-.
2. Copy of the Cash Deposit Slip dated 10.07.2008 for Rs.1677/- as deposited by the complainant with the OP No.6.
3. Copy of the Credit card statement dated 16.07.2008 issued by the OP No.5 to the complainant.
4. Copy of the Credit card statement dated 09.07.2008 issued by the OP No.1 to the complainant.
5. Copy of the Credit card statement dated 11.04.2013 derived by the complainant from the website of the OP No.1.
Decision with reason
All the issues are taken up together for the brevity and convenience of discussion.
It appears from the purchase slip that complainant purchased some articles on 22.06.2008 from OP No.4 at 15:21:18 from City Style, Second Mile, Sevoke Road, Siliguri with card No.............4006 swiped amounting to Rs.1,677/-. On the head of the receipt, there is symbol of HDFC BANK. From para 8 of the complaint, this card was given to the OP No.4. At para 9 complainant gave another being No......2567 to the OP No.4. OP No.4 informed the complainant regarding successful of swiping of HDFC Credit card, but Xerox copy filed by the complainant shows that this card bearing No.........4006 has been issued by the OP No.1 as per statement in para-8. There is no mention regarding another credit card No........2567 issued by the OP No.5 that OP No.4 swiped this card. In absence of a copy issued by the card swiping authority, it cannot be said what card specially the card ending with number ...2567 was swiped by the OP No.4. The complainant is raising self contradictory
-:5:-
case in para 7, 8 & 9 and by the Xerox copy of swiping record in the heard HDFC BANK and with card No......4006. There is no cogent evidence regarding double payment for purchasing single article. In the circumstances, this Forum is unable to make any conclusion regarding the liability of OP No.4 and claim of complainant for double payment as there is no cogent reasonable and acceptable evidence in record.
So, we are of opinion that the material on record is unable to prove this case.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the Consumer Case No.74/S/2013 be and the same is dismissed on contest but without cost.
Let copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost.
-Member- -President-
