Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

cc/283/2007

A.S. Philip - Complainant(s)

Versus

American Express Bank Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

V.V. Giridhar

18 Jan 2018

ORDER

                                                                                                                           Date of Filing  : 16.05.2007

                                                                          Date of Order : 18.01.2018

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNA (SOUTH)

2^ND Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L,                    : PRESIDENT

                 TMT. K. AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.                                :  MEMBER-I

CC. NO.283/2007

THURSDAY THE 18^th DAY OF JANUARY 2018                                              

A.S. Philip,

F2 No.3, Cresent Park 3^rd Street.,

Gandhi Nagar,

Adyar, Chennai 600 020.                                                 .. Complainant

                                      ..Vs..

 

1. The American Express Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Manager,

Travel Related Services,

Post Bag No.342,

Cannaught Place,

New Delhi 110 011. 

 

2. American Express Bank Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

Post Box No.3742,

Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.                            

 

3.Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager,

Golden Enclave,

No.275, Poonamallee High Road,

Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.                             .. Opposite parties.

 

 

Counsel for complainant                 :  M/s. V.V.Giridhar 

Counsel for opposite parties 1 & 2 :  M/s. K.Suresh Babu & another. 

Counsel for opposite party-3          :   Exparte.   

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section  12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,00,000/- as deficiency in service and Rs.10,000/- as cost of the complaint.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:

          The complainant submit that he is the credit card holder of the American Express card issued by the opposite parties 1 & 2 bearing No.376916830621002.  During the year 2009 he wanted to go to United Kingdom along with his wife and booked two Air tickets with the 3^rd opposite party Akbar Travels  India Pvt. Ltd and purchased the tickets for a sum of Rs.3 lakhs on 23.6.2006.  The complainant used the credit card of opposite parties 1 & 2 towards payment due to the 3^rd opposite party the transaction also approved by the opposite parties.   During the 2^nd week of July 2006 the tickets were blocked for the journey to United Kingdom.  Immediately  the complainant contacted the 3^rd opposite party  with regard to the inclusion of the transaction which has not been given effect to the complainant.  The opposite party issued letter dated 19.11.2006 to the 3^rd opposite party stating that the transaction was carried out without the approval of opposite parties 1 & 2 and the complainant is under the review  and routine investigation are under process.  Further the complainant state that he was a regular customer making the payment for several  lakhs without any default.  He is running a business of arranging imported and exported code issued by Government of India, Ministry of Commerce.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 have no right to withhold the transaction after giving the approval and given credit to the statement of accounts.     Further the complainant state that he made very clear  through representations that he is not liable to pay Rs.3 lakhs and other charges since he has not utilized the amount for that the opposite parties made threat through phone calls and collection agent .  Hence the complainant was constrained to lodge police complaint.  Thereafter the complainant initiated proceedings through Banking Ombudsman which is still pending.  On 17.11.2006 the opposite parties 1 & 2 informed that they have reversed all the payments.     As such the act of the opposite party amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant. 

2. The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties 1 & 2  is as follows:

The  opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.  The opposite parties submit that as per the agreement clause 25 this Forum having no jurisdiction to entertain the case.   The opposite parties also state that the complainant availed the credit card of the opposite parties. On 23.6.2006 complainant purchased two tickets for Rs.3 lakhs for foreign  travel from M/s. Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd.,  who is the service establishment of opposite parties 1 & 2.   Further the opposite parties 1 & 2 states that in violation of the terms of agreement the service establishment i.e opposite party-3 sold the tickets to the complainant without  obtaining prior authorization from opposite party-1.  Hence the amount was suspended.   The other two amounts namely Rs.10,000/- and Rs.50,000/- were allowed in anticipation of settlement of earlier charges.  All the three transactions  were debited to the complainant account.  On receipt of payment by him the charge of Rs.3 lakhs was to be released to the service establishment.  After the position was clarified the amounts charged to the  complainant’s  card account have been reversed and the account settled.     Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite  parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     Inspite of service of notice the opposite party-3 is called absent and

set exparte.

 

4. In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.13 marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and no documents marked on the side of the  opposite parties.

 

 5.     The points for consideration is :       

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony as prayed for?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards deficiency in service with cost as prayed ?

6.      POINTS 1 & 2:

        Heard both sides.  Perused the records (viz) complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  The learned counsel for the complainant contended that admittedly the complainant is a credit card holder of the American Express card issued by the opposite parties 1 & 2 bearing No.376916830621002. The learned counsel further contended that during the year 2009 complainant wanted to go to UK along with his wife and booked two Air tickets with the 3^rd opposite party Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd and purchased the tickets for a sum of Rs.3 lakhs on 23.6.2006.  The complainant used credit card of the opposite parties 1 & 2 towards payment  to the 3^rd opposite party; the transaction also approved by the opposite parties. But  during the 2^nd week of July 2006 the tickets were blocked for the journey to U.K.  Immediately  the complainant contacted the 3^rd opposite party who in turn stated that the payments were not cleared by the opposite parties 1 & 2.  The opposite party issued letter dated 19.11.2006 to the 3^rd opposite party stating that the transaction was carried out without the approval of opposite parties 1 & 2 and the complainant is under the review  and routine investigation are under process. By letter dated 3.11.2006  3^rd opposite party informed that the complainant  may be a fraudulent person; which caused great mental agony to the complainant. Learned counsel contended that on 27.6.2006 and 4.7.2006 the complainant used the said credit card and made transaction for Rs.10,000/- and Rs.50,000/- respectively;  were duly honoured by the bank.   Further the learned counsel for the complainant contended that in the statement of account dated 19.7.2006 for the month of June 2006 the complainant was asked to pay a sum of Rs.3,60,000/-; when the complainant questioned the same the opposite parties 1 & 2 informed that they have withhold the credit card;  without any proper reason.   Further the complainant contended that he was a regular customer making the payment for several  lakhs without any default.  He is running a business of arranging imported and exported code issued by Government of India, Ministry of Commerce.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 have no right to withhold the transaction after giving the approval and given credit to the statement of accounts which amounts to unfair trade practice.   Further the complainant contended that he made very clear  through representations that he is not liable to pay Rs.3 lakhs and other charges since he has not utilized the amount; for that the opposite parties made threat through phone calls and collection agents .  Hence the complainant was constrained to lodge police complaint.   On 25.8.2006 the complainant issued legal notice for which opposite party sent a reply with untenable contentions.  Thereafter the complainant initiated proceedings through Banking Ombudsman which is still pending.  On 17.11.2006 the opposite parties 1 & 2 informed that they have reversed all the payments and charges to the tune of Rs.67,176/- and Annual fee of Rs.3,479/- towards the credit card proves the deficiency of service.  The complainant  is claiming a sum of Rs.5 lakhs towards compensation for mental agony and deficiency of service.  But the complainant has not proved the said huge claim in such a logical manner.

7.     The learned counsel for the opposite parties contended that as per the agreement clause 25 this Forum having no jurisdiction to entertain the case, the jurisdiction lies on the courts in  state of Delhi.  But on a careful perusal of records it is seen that all the transactions including availing credit card facility taken place only at Chennai as per Sec.11 (2)(a) (c ) of the C.P. Act  1986 as follows:

        11 (2) “A complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limits of whose jurisdiction.

1. The opposite party or each of the opposite parties where there are more than at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides or (carries on business or has a branch office or) personally works for gain or
2. Any of the opposite parties where there are more than one, at the time of the institution of the complaint, actually and voluntarily resides, or (carriers on business or has a branch office) or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the permission of the District Forum is given, or the opposite parties who do not resides, or (carry on business or have a branch office) or personally work for gain, as the case may be acquiesce in such institution ;  or
3.  The cause of action, wholly or in part arises.

Further the contention of the opposite parties is that admittedly the complainant availed the credit card of the opposite parties and on 23.6.2006 complainant purchased two tickets for Rs.3 lakhs for foreign  travel from M/s. Akbar Travels of India Pvt. Ltd.,  who is the service establishment of opposite parties 1 & 2.   Further the contention of opposite parties 1 & 2 is that in violation of the terms of agreement the service establishment i.e opposite party-3 sold the tickets to the complainant without  obtaining prior authorization from opposite party-1.  Hence the amount was suspended.   The other two amounts namely Rs.10,000/- and Rs.50,000/- were allowed in anticipation of settlement of earlier charges.  All the three transactions  were debited to the complainant and was released to the service establishment, opposite party-3.  After due clarification of the accounts the entire amount reversed and accounts settled.  The allegation of threat by the opposite parties officials  have no connection and are imaginary .   There is no deficiency of service of any kind in this case.  The allegation of mental agony, irreparable loss of property and reputation is imaginary.  But the opposite parties 1, 2 and 3 after blocking the tickets failed to credit the amount resulting non performance of travel may cause mental agony.  Equally issuing the statement of account showing for a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- with other charges proves that there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay a  sum of Rs.40,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5000/- and the points are answered accordingly.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite parties 1 to 3  are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony  with cost of Rs.5,000/-  (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant. 

The above  amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.

Dictated  by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 18^th day of January 2018.

 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                         PRESIDENT.

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1- 8.9.2005  - Copy of certificate issued in favour of complainant.

Ex.A2-             - Copy of summary charges of the credit card.

Ex.A3- 23.1.2006 - Copy of transaction slip

Ex.A4- 3.7.2006  - Copy of letter issued by the 3^rd opposite party.

Ex.A5- 9.8.2006  - Copy of letter sent by the 1^st opposite party.

Ex.A6- 25.8.2006 - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A7- 31.8.2006 - Copy of reply notice.

Ex.A8- 20.9.2006 - Copy of police complaint.

Ex.A9- 21.9.2006 - Copy of receipt.

Ex.A10- 10.11.2006- Copy of notice sent by the 1^st opp. party.

Ex.A11- 17.11.2006- Copy of letter sent by the 1^st opp. party.

Ex.A12- 17.11.2006- Copy of letter sent by the 1^st opp. party.

Ex.A13-              -  Copy of statement of credit card

 

OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  .. Nil..

 

MEMBER –I                                                                     PRESIDENT.