Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/316/2015

M/s.S.Ashok Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.Jenkins William

26 Aug 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 02.07.2015

Date of Reservation      : 26.07.2022

Date of Order               : 26.08.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                            : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                      THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 316/2015

FRIDAY, THE 26^th DAY OF AUGUST 2022

Mr.S.Ashok Kumar,

S/o Shantilal Jain,

No.55, 1^st Main Road,

New Colony, Chromepet,

Chennai-600044.                                                                ... Complainant   

..Vs..

1)Chief Manager,

   ICICI Bank Limited,

   Credit Card Division,

   No.46, Gandhi Mandapam Road,

   Kotturpuram,

   Chennai-600 085.

 

2)Chief Manager,

   ICICI Bank Limited,

   ICICI Towers,

   Plot No.24, South Phase,

   2^ndFloor East Wing, Ambattur Industial Estate,

   Ambattur, Chennai - 600 058.

 

3)General Manager,

   ICICI Bank Limited,

   ICICI Bank Towers,

   Bandra-Kurla Complex,

   Mumbai 400 051.                                                      ...  Opposite Parties

******

Counsel for the Complainant       :M/s. I. Jenkins William

Counsel for the Opposite Parties  : M/s. K. Moorthy

 

        On perusal of records and on hearing the oral argument of the Counsel for the Complainant and the Counsel for the Opposite Parties, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation for the continuous harassment meted out to the Complainant for the 9 years by the mindless calls made by the collection agents and to pay Rs.10,00,000/- for the deficiency in service and the unfair trade practice which has been practiced by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Party including a sum of Rs.300/- which has been illegally charged by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Party  wrongly from the Complainant as if he has made a late payment due to the return of the cheque  totalling summing up to Rs.20,00,000/- as stated above as compensation towards the deficiency in service and the mental agony meted out to the Complainant.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant owns and runs goods transport business, Cement Wholesaler and delivers goods to various parts of his State. The 1^stOpposite Party came to the company office of the Complainant and persuaded the Complainant to get a credit card in his name. The Complainant availed a credit card facility from Opposite Party bank.After purchase of the said credit card bearing No.4477463806821001, the Complainant has been using the said card in a very responsible way. Whatever he purchased or spent through his credit card in any given month would be repaid by him in full at the end of the month itself as soon as he would receive his bill for any given month. The Complainant received a credit card bill statement for October 2005 from the 1^st Opposite Party for a sum of Rs.8434.75/-. The Opposite Party's collection representatives was called to the Complainant's office and was handed over a Cheque drawn on Union Bank, Chrompet Branch bearing Cheque No.386467 dated 14/11/2005 for Rs.8434.75 only. It was encashed by the 1^stOpposite Party towards discharge of the Complainant's credit card bill dated November 2005 for the Credit Card bearing No.4477463806821001, which also clearly reflected in the same month's credit card bill statement. But the problem in the statement was that instead of showing credit of only one entry in the Complainant's credit card statement for Rs.8434.75 there was a double entry. To be clear it was shown as if the Complainant had paid Rs.8434.75 twice with the same cheque, the Complainant, understanding that it was a clerical error done by 1^stOpposite Party, immediately called up the representative of the 1st Opposite Party who took the cheque and explained to him the error in the Statement of Accounts. The said representative also informed the Complainant that he would take care of the same and that the same would be rectified immediately and a fresh statement to that effect would be issued by the Opposite Parties. On February 2006, the Complainant received a bill/expense statement for his credit card from all Opposite Party for the period of Jan Feb 2006. Upon reading the said expense statement he was shocked to note that instead of just deleting one of the wrong double entries of Rs.8434.75 made by all Opposite Party, have shown in the bill/expense statement as if that the Complainant's cheque for Rs.8434.75 has been returned by the bank  and a late payment charge of Rs.300/- has also been charged against the Complainant's credit card bill. It would not be out of place to point out that the Complainant on any given day during November 2005 had only an excess of Rs.16 Lakhs in his current account No.527505040029014, and the aforesaid allegedly returned cheques could have easily been passed. Moreover the Complainant had not given any stop payment instruction to his bank for any cheque. When that be so, the Complainant is unable to understand as to how the story of return of cheque for Rs.8434.75 has been fabricated by the Opposite Parties against the Complainant. The Complainant immediately called up the representative of the 1^stOpposite Party who took the cheque and explained to him the error in the Statement of Accounts. He gave the customer care number and instructed the Complainant to call them and lodge a complaint. The Complainant complained to the customer care of the 1^stand 2^nd Opposite Party on various dates (viz-a-viz) 23.03.2006, 06.04.2006, 07.04.2006, and 08.04.2006. But even after the said complaints lodged by the Complainant the 1^stand 2^ndOpposite Parties have not taken any action for the past almost 9 years. This type of mental agony and unfair trade practice created by the Opposite Parties collection agents by calling up the Complainant over his house landline number and speaking and repeating the same complaints is creating unexplainable and immense torture to him and his family. The Complainant had issued a legal notice through his counsel to the Opposite Parties Nos. 1 to 3 on 12.2.2015, claiming for a sum of Rs.20,00,300/- as compensation  upon receipt of the notice the Opposite Parties herein have sent a frivolous reply dated 25.3.2015 stating that they do not have the records pertaining to that transaction. Hence the complaint.

3.  Written Version filed by the Opposite Parties in brief are as follows:-

        The Opposite Parties state that the true facts remains that only one

cheque was received from the complainant towards the payment for his

credit card which is issued after the due date and hence the late fee charge of Rs 300/- was levied as per the terms of the contract. Since, the complainant made payment beyond the due date the said charge was levied as per the terms. However, for the reasons best known to the complainant, he had made several false and frivolous allegations and filed the above complainant without any truth. The Complainant applied for Credit Card service with the 1^st Opposite party and by request of the Complainant the Opposite party had send its representative to the complainant's place and explained clearly about the complete details, specification, features, terms and conditions etc. The clerical error in the statement was immediately rectified and a fresh statement was also sent

to the Complainant.The cheque produced by the Complainant for the payment of credit card bill was returned due to "insufficient fund". It is for the Complainant who is liable to prove the sum of Rs. 16 lakhs was balance in his account as on the date. The Opposite Parties never harassed the Complainant and proper services has been rendered and never been deficient in  service. All the complaints and letter raised by the Complainant was replied in time and responded in proper way by the Opposite Party. Hence the Complainant is not entitled for the compensation. Hence prayed to dismiss the complaint.

4.  The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-8  were marked. The Opposite Parties submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Opposite Parties, documents Ex.B-1 alone was marked.

5.     Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

The Complainant had availed Credit Card from the 1^st Opposite party bearing No. 4477463806821001, and was using the same. He had received a Credit Card Bill Statement for the month of October 2005 for Rs.8434.75 towards discharge of the bill he issued a cheque bearing No.386467 dated 14.11.2005 drawn on Union Bank of India to the 1^st Opposite Party, which was encashed by the 1^st Opposite party as found in Ex.A-3 series, Pg 12. However in the statement instead of showing one entry in the Credit Card Statement for the cheque amount of Rs.8434.75,there was double entry. When the Complainant pointed out the error to the 1^st Opposite Party they informed the Complainant that the defect would be rectified. In the month of February 2006 the Complainant received Bill Statement for his credit card for the period of January 2006, showing that the Complainant’s cheque for Rs.8434.75 was returned and a late payment charge of Rs.300/- has been charged in the bill as found in Ex.A-3 series, Pg 13. The Complainant had contacted the 1^st Opposite Party and explained the error in the Statement of Account as found in Ex.A-5, but even after several complaints the Opposite Parties had not rectified the mistake and keep charging on the cheque return charges. It is evident that the Complainant had sufficient balance in the Account and had also not given any stop payment instructions, while so there is no reason for returning the cheque and collect charges for such return. The Opposite Parties had failed to produce the alleged return of cheque.

The Opposite Parties contend that the Complainant had issued cheques towards the payment for his credit card after the due date and hence late fee of Rs.300/- was levied as per the terms of the contract. The clerical error in the statement was immediately rectified and a fresh statement was also sent to the Complainant. The cheque produced by the Complainant for payment of credit card bill was returned due to “Insufficient Funds” and the Complainant had to prove that he had Rs.16 lakhs balance in his account on that date. The Opposite Party was rendering proper services and never been deficient in its service.

      The contention of the Opposite Parties that late fee of Rs.300/- was levied due to delay in payment will not hold good as the Complainant had issued cheque for Rs.8434.75 in time and it was due to the error of double entry made by the 1^st Opposite Party, the cheque was shown as returned belatedly with late fee charges. The Complainant was maintaining sufficient balance in his account and the reason alleged the Opposite Parties that the cheque was returned due to “Insufficient Funds”  only shows the lethargic and negligent attitude of the Opposite Parties. In view of the forgoing discussion we hold that the Opposite Parties were negligent and committed deficiency of service to the Complainant.  Accordingly Point No.1 is answered in favour of the Complainant.

Point No.2:-

As discussed and decide above in point No.1 against the opposite parties, is directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for the deficiency in service along with a sum of Rs.300/- illegally charged by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties for the return of cheque and to pay cost of Rs.3,000/-. And the complainant is not entitled for any other relief/s.  Accordingly Point No.2 is answered.  

     In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Parties 1 and 2 are jointly and severally  directed to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) towards compensation for the deficiency in service along with a sum of Rs.300/- (Rupees Three Hundred Only) illegally charged by the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties for the return of cheque and to pay cost of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of this order till the date of realisation.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 26^th of August 2022. 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	31.01.2015	Copy of Statement of bank accounts of the Complainant for the month of Nov 2005
Ex.A2	07.02.2005	Copy of Statement of bank accounts of the Complainant for the month of 07.02.2015
Ex.A3	29.11.2005	Copy of Credit card statement by ICICI Bank
Ex.A4	19.06.2009	Copy of Demand notice by lawyer of ICICI Bank
Ex.A5	-	Call record of ICICI Bank Customer Care
Ex.A6	12.02.2015	Copy of Legal Notice sent by the Counsel for Complainant to the 2nd and 3rd Opposite Party (with postal receipts)
Ex.A7	25.03.2015	Copy of Reply to legal notice sent by Opposite Party
Ex.A8	31.01.2015	Copy of bank statement of accounts for the period 1/12/2005 to 31/12/2005 for the account No.527505040029014 in the Union Bank of India, Chrompet Branch.

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

Ex.B1

25.03.2015

Copy of Reply to legal notice

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT