DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                C.C.NO.08 OF 2022

Sri.  Biswanath Barik

S/O: Damodar Barik

AT-Qtrs No-13, Agriculture Colony

PO/PS- Phulbani town, Dist- Kandhamal.                            ……………………….. Complainant.

                                Versus.

Chief Manager,

State Bank of  India,

Main Branch,Phulbani, Mainroad

PO/PS- Phulbani Town

Dist.- Kandhamal                                                              …………………………….. OPP. Parties.

Present: Sri Purna Chandra Mishra    - President.

                 Sri Sudhakar Senapothi     - Member .

For the Complainant: Self

For O.P- None (Ex-parte)

Date of Argument:  10.06.2022

Date of Order:  24-06-2022

       -2-

JUDGEMENT

Mr. Sudhakar Senapothi. Member          

The complainant Mr.Biswanath Barik has filed this case U/S 35  of C.P Act, 2019 alleging  deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on part of the OP for deducting a sum of Rs.21,193/-(Twenty one thousand one hundred ninety three)only from his saving bank account without  his knowledge and consent,  praying therein for a direction to the OP to credit a sum of Rs.21,193/- to his saving bank   account with interest@18% per annum  till it is paid to him along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs,10,000/-.

1. Brief fact leading to the case is that the petitioner is having a Saving Bank A/C bearing No. 10812153723 in State Bank India, Phulbani branch. The OP issued a credit card bearing no.4726427585954431 in the month of December 2017 with credit limit of Rs.97, 000/-(Ninety seven thousand) only. As it was issued without his willingness, he never used the card but on 30.09.2020 a sum of Rs.8722/- was debited from his account. In order to get back the money, he approached the OP several times  but the OP did not respond and finally the petitioner surrendered the credit card on 27.09.2021 along with a written request. Even after that there was regular deduction from his account amounting to Rs.21, 193/- and feeling   helpless, the petitioner   issued a legal notice through his advocate on 28.01.2022 to settle the matter but of no avail. The complainant feeling harassed and finding no other alternative has been compelled to file this case before this Commission to get reliefs and Justice.
2. Notice was sent to the OP which was duly served on him. In spite of notice, the OP preferred not to appear and was set ex-parte by the orders of this Commission on 09.06.2022.
3. The Complainant in support of his case has filed the copy of the VISA card statement showing deduction of money from his account and his evidence in support of his case.
4. The issue before us is whether the credit card was issued without the consent of the petitioner? The petitioner in his complaint petition has categorically   pleaded in para-3 that the credit card has been issued without his consent. The OP has preferred not to appear or challenge the allegation raised against him by the petitioner. Therefore, it is presumed  that the OP has admitted the allegation raised against him in the complaint petition. Besides, the Complainant has filed his evidence in shape of affidavit wherein he has clearly      mentioned that without his consent in the month of December 2017, the credit card has been issued to him. The evidence led by the petitioner stands uncontroverted. So there in no doubt about the fact that the credit card has been issued without the consent of the petitioner.
5. Now comes the question whether the amount deducted by the OP is in accordance  with law and justified?

It is clear from the preceding discussion that the credit card has been issued without the knowledge and consent of the complainant. It is clear from his evidence that a sum of Rs.21, 193/- has been debited from his account unauthorized. It is therefore very much clear that the credit card has been issued without the knowledge and consent of the complainant and the amount deducted on this head is completely unjustified.

We are of the opinion that the OP has resorted to the unfair trade practice by issuing the credit card without the consent of the complainant and by deducting a sum of Rs.21,193/- from his account unauthorized and has caused deficiency in service by not   restoring the deducted amount to the account of the complainant after verbal and written complaint and have also harassed the petitioner unnecessarily by his misconduct and hence   the  order.

ORDER

The complaint petition is allowed ex-parte against the OP. The OP is directed to restore a sum of Rs.21, 193/- to the account of the complainant forthwith on receipt of the order. The Op is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.20, 000/- towards unfair trade practice, deficiency in service and harassment caused to the complainant. The OP is further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards cost of litigation. The order as to cost and compensation is to be complied within a period of 30days, failing which it will carry interest @9%P.A from the date of order till it is paid to the complainant.

                I Agree

                PRESIDENT                                                                                          MEMBER

Pronounced in the open Commissioner today on this 24th day of June 2022 in the presence of the parties.

             PRESIDENT                                                                                               MEMBER