Date of Filing: 08/08/2016
Date of Order: 24/11/2017
ORDER
BY SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT
1. This is the complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging the deficiency in service against the O.Ps and prays for orders to direct the O.Ps to repay Rs.1,349/- along with compound interest at the rate of 24% per annum from the date of receipt of payment to till the date of realization, to pay Rs.10,000/- towards compensation and to pay cost of the proceedings.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are that, it is stated that, O.P approached the complainant and requested to avail the credit card facilities and services from the O.P Bank. Further O.P Bank had promised to issue higher level of credit facilities. It is stated that, O.P Bank had issued credit card to the complainant on 14.10.2013 and further receipt of the said card it was noticed that the credit limit was low and it was not befitting the status of the complainant. Hence it is stated that complainant approached the O.P bank and requested to do needful and further O.P bank did not respond for the same. Hence it is stated that complainant surrendered the credit card without using it and the same was surrendered by the complainant on 5.11.2013. The O.P bank demanded the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.1,348/- towards annual credit limit. It is alleged that O.p bank was being at fault in honouring the promise made to the complainant and raised the aforesaid demand. Further states that the complainant being law abiding citizen paid a sum of Rs.1,349/- with a clear understanding with the O.p bank to reverse the charges to the personal account of the complainant. Upon completion of the O.P bank formalities in closure of the credit card. As O.P bank could not provide the complainant with agreed credit facility to the credit card the complainant was require to return the entire credit kit to the O.P. Further the complainant on 5.11.2013 returned the entire credit card kit as it was received and demanded the O.P bank that without providing any service to reverse the charges levied by the O.P bank. The further alleged without giving any kind of service O.P bank collected amount of Rs.1,349/- and violated the secret code of banking agencies. Further it is stated that, when the O.P bank failed to yield to the demand of the complainant finally got issued the legal notice dated 24.02.2016 and demanded to pay back the amount of Rs.1,349/- but O.P did not comply the demand made in the notice nor reply the same. Hence this complaint.
3. Upon issuance of notice O.P entered appearance through its counsel and filed its version. In the version O.P. contended that, the complaint is barred by limitation and the same is filed after more than three years. Further contended that complainant has no locus-standi to file the complaint against O.P. Bank. It is admitted that complainant had approached the O.P for issuance of credit card for his personal use. Accordingly, after considering the credit worthiness with certain terms and conditions, O.P bank issued the credit card but that card limit was of Rs.18,000/-. Further the complainant has signed the required forms and documents accepting the terms and conditions of the said credit card facility. Further contended that as per the terms and conditions of the said credit card O.P bank had levied the joining fee of Rs.1,200/- and service tax of Rs.148.32 from the complainant which is in terms of existing and rules and practice of the bank said facility. Hence contended that the allegations made in the complaint are false, baseless and merit less. Further contended that O.P bank has not committed any deficiency in service and has acted in good faith. Further O.P bank denies all other allegations of the complainant averred in the complaint and finally prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In order to substantiate the case of the parties and both parties filed their affidavit evidence and we also heard the arguments.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following points will arise for our consideration:-
(A) Whether the complainant has proved
deficiency in service on the part of the O.P?
(B) Whether the complainant is entitled to
the relief as prayed for in the complaint?
(C) What order?
6. Our answers to the above points are:-
POINT (A) & (B): In the Negative.
POINT (C): As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
POINT No. (A) & (B):-
7. On perusal of the rival pleadings of the parties it is not in dispute that the complainant by availing service of the O.P bank complainant got obtained the facility of credit card to the limit of Rs.18,000/-. The sole allegation of the complainant is that the O.P assured to provide a higher credit facility and hence he has obtained the credit card. Subsequent to obtaining the credit card in question the complainant came to know that the credit limit is low and same does not suit to his status.
8. Per-contra, O.P bank contended that as per the credit worthiness of the customer/complainant the bank has issued the credit card and complainant has duly signed the required documents by accepting the terms and conditions of the bank.
9. The crux of the matter is to consider whether the complainant is entitled for refund of Rs.1,349/- paid towards surrendering of the credit card?
10. It is note worthy to note that the complainant nowhere in his complaint are in his evidence stated that he has approached the O.p bank and requested for higher credit limit to an extent of Rs.? And in the absence of the demand made by the complainant without any supporting evidence the allegations of the complainant is mere lame of strength and which holds no water. Complainant is also not produced any documents to show that he has demanded higher credit limit and has shown his credit worthiness in order to get the facility of higher level of credit card. Furthermore it is prerogative powers of the bank to honour the credit worthiness of the customer and to give facility of credit card. As a matter of fact the bank being trustee of the people has acted in accordance with the certain banking norms and rules. Therefore, we are of the view that the complainant as a matter of right cannot demand higher level credit limit and the bank has issued in accordance to the credit worthiness of the complainant. The Complainant has not shown his nominal income in order to suit his status. Hence such allegation of the complainant cannot be considered.
11. Further it is pertinent to note that, as per saying for the complainant credit card issued to him on 14.10.2013 and the same is returned on 5.11.2013 and cause of action accrued to the complainant only on 5.11.2013 i.e when he surrendered the credit card and paid the amount but the complainant filed this present complaint after the lapse three years. According to Section 24 A of the consumer Protection Act the complainant is barred by limitation.
12. In the light of above discussion we reached to conclusion and viewing from any angle complainant has failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and hence the complainant is not entitled for the relief as sought in the complaint and accordingly the complaint is hereby dismissed. Accordingly we answered these points in the Negative.
POINT (C):
13. On the basis of answering the Points (A) and (B) in the Negative, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
1. The complaint hereby is dismissed. No order as to cost.
2. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 24rd Day of NOVEMBER 2017)
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
*RAK
