Date of Filing: 12.09.2016

                                                                                         Date of Order: 29.10.2018      

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD

P r e s e n t­

HON’BLE Sri P.Vijender, B.Sc. L.L.B.  PRESIDENT.

HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER.

Monday, the 29^th day of October, 2018

C.C.No.435 /2016

Between

V.Srikant S/o. Sri V.Rama Chary (Late)

Plot No.38, Sri Venkateshwara Colony,

Lothukunta, Trimulgherry Post,

Secunderabad – 500015.                                                                           ……Complainant

And

1. Officer Customer Care, Citibank NA,

2, Club House Road,

Chennai – 600002.

2. The Manager,

Citi Corp. Finance (India) Ltd.,

8^th FI, FIFC, G Block,

Bandra Kurla Complex,

Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400051.

3. The Divisional Manager,

The New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,

Citi Bank Divisional Office -712,

260, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600006.                                           ….Opposite Parties

Counsel for the complainant               :  Party in Person

Counsel for the Opposite Parties       :  Sri S.Nagesh Reddy, O.P.No.1

                                                                          :  O.P.No.2 called absent

                                                                          :  Sri D.R.Kulkarni O.P.No.3

O R D E R

(By Sri. Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)

            This complaint is preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction to the Opposite Party No.3 to issue Good Health Policy from October 2015 and to restore the credit card by Opposite Party No.1 and a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- for the financial loss suffered by him, on account of taking new Policy and further Rs.5,00,000/- for the mental agony suffered by him and his family members and the costs of the complaint.    

1. The complainant’s case is: he has obtained Health Policy from Opposite Party No.3 through Opposite Party No.1 with effect from 1993 and it continued up to 2015.  He is a credit card holder of Opposite Party No.1 since 1990 valid and due for renewal only on 01.02.2016.  The health policy issued by Opposite Party No.3 through Opposite Party No.1 bearing No.71250034142100000013, commenced from 01.10.2014 and valid till October 2015 and covers five (5) members of his family at annual premium of Rs.22,786/-.
2.         The complainant paid debit amount of credit card to Opposite Party No.1 regularly every year and he received Good health policy for all the years right from 1993.  He paid debit amount of Rs.25,250/- on 13.01.2015 for the policy issued for the year 2014-2015.  As on 23.01.2015 an amount of Rs.29,000/- remained to his credit as per the Statement of Account received from Opposite Party No.1.  The Opposite Party No.3 in it’s letter in reference No.4022/GH/OCT 14/6723, dated 14.08.2015 sent policy renewal notice for the period from October 2015 to September 2016.  As per the practice the Insurance Policy is automatically renewed for the Citi Bank card holders.  Even then the complainant made a request to Opposite Parties to renew the policy on 20.08.2015 on existing terms by making an endorsement on the renewal notice.  He neither received the renewal policy nor any communication from Opposite Party No.1 or Opposite Party No.3.  He had sent reminder letters on 09.01.2016 & 02.02.2016 for renewal of the Policy.
3.         Later, the complainant received a letter dated 14.04.2016 from Opposite Party No.1 stating that, they are unable to renew the Policy due to insufficient credit limit available to his credit.  He received another letter dated 24.02.2016 from Opposite Party No.1 stating that, his credit card was not renewed and closed, since, e-mail ID mentioned in the card was incorrect.  He also received letter dated 25.02.2016 stating that, they were investigating the query and will take some time to resolve.  The complainant took up the matter by a letter dated 10.03.2016 questioning the Opposite Party No.1 about the intimation sent to him stating that insufficient credit in his credit.  He made a request to checkup records and arrange to restore the credit card and prompt the Insurance Company to issue renewed policy with effect from October 2015.  By same letter he also requested Opposite Party No.3 to renew the Policy assuring direct payment if required but there was no reply from both the parties. 
4.         The Opposite Parties have committed deficiency of service by not informing the complainant in advance that, the credit is not available for payment of the premium and that card was closed due to incorrect e-mail ID.  The Opposite Parties committed unfair trade practice by not performing functions by advance information about the availability of the credit and failure to renew the Policy automatically and thereby causing credit loss and mental agony to the complainant.  Hence, the present complaint for the reliefs stated supra. 
5.    Opposite Party No.1 filed written version stating that, the complainant availed Citi Cash Back Titanium card and it was due for renewal in the month of December 2014 but, as the complainant failed to pay the amount due for two consecutive months, the card was not renewed.  As per the records as on October 2016 an amount of Rs.25,550-60 ps., was outstanding on the card of the complainant.   The complainant failed to pay amount due even by November & December 2014.  The said outstanding amount was paid only on 13.01.2015.  On account of considerable delay in payment of outstanding due for two consecutive months the complainant’s credit card was not renewed in December 2014 and was closed on 27.12.2014.
6. Closing of complainant’s credit card is in accordance with Clause-26.1 of the Card Member Agreement which is binding on both the parties.  The said clause reads under:

“The privileges of the credit card may be withdrawn and the credit card cancelled by Citibank of any time, including on the occurrence of an event of default (in its absolute discretion and without giving notice thereof to the card member of assigning any reason thereof) either temporarily or permanently.”  Due to closure of the complainant’s card on 27.12.2014 premium for the policy was not debited.  The claim of the complainant that his credit card was due for renewal only on 01.02.2016 is incorrect.  The Opposite Party No.1 is only a facilitator between the complainant and Opposite Party No.3 and it used to provide various facilities to it’s customers especially the credit card holders who could avail the benefits of payment of the premium through the credit card by automatically debiting amount.  The Insurance Policy is automatically renewed for the card holders of the Bank subject to regular and proper maintenance of credit card account by the card holder and payment of amounts due within the stipulated period as per the terms and conditions of the card holder agreement.  Since, the complainant’s credit card account was closed on account of non-payment of amount dues by him, the insurance premium could be paid to Opposite Party No.3.  The statement of complainant’s account dated 23.01.2015 shows credit limit on the card but the said limit was not available subsequently as the credit card itself was closed due to non-payment of amount due.  By over sight it mentioned that, credit card was closed as the e-mail ID was incorrect the closure of the credit card was on account of non-payment of amount due.

7. All the letters addressed by the complainant are replied and there is no deficiency of service to the complainant in closing the credit card.  Hence, the complainant is not entitled for any of the reliefs against the Opposite Party No.1.
8. Opposite Party No.3 filed separate written version stating that, it had issued Good health Policy for the period from 01.10.2014 to 30.09.2015.  The Company issued Policy only after receipt of the premium from the applicants and there is no practice or system of renewal the Policies automatically for the Citi Bank card holders.  The complainant cannot take it for granted to renew the Policy without paying the premium.  As per the general terms and conditions the Company shall not be responsible or liable in non-renewal of policy for any reason whatsoever arising out of any decision of Citibank in that regard.  Renewal of the Policy is automatic only on payment of premium by the Citibank to the Company before the due date on behalf of credit card holder or account holder as applicable.  Since, premium was not received the question of issuing a Policy by the Company to the complainant for the period from 01.10.2015 does not arise.  As premium was not received by the Company for the period from 01.10.2015 to 30.09.2016 Policy was not renewed and there is no deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Party No.3.  Hence, the complainant is not entitled for any of the reliefs against the Opposite Party No.3.              
9.  In the enquiry proceedings the complainant has got filed her evidence affidavit reiterating the substance of the complaint.  He has got exhibited 18 documents.  For Opposite Party No.1.  The evidence affidavit of Amaresh Adibatla stated to be it’s Power of Attorney and authorized signatory is filed and he got exhibited two (2) documents.  For Opposite Party No.3 the evidence affidavit of             Mr. Nageswara Rao stated to be Regional Manager of it, he has got filed and through him one (1) document is exhibited. 
10. Complainant submitted written as well as oral arguments and for Opposite Party oral submissions were made.
11.  On a consideration of material placed on record by the parties to complaint the following points have arisen for consideration.        

1. Whether the Opposite Party nos.1 & 2 caused deficiency of service to the complainant as alleged by him?
2. To what relief the complainant is entitled for ?

12.  Point No.1:  The admitted fact is the complainant had Mediseva Insurance cover from Opposite Party No.3 Company with effect from 1993 to September 2015 and he was credit card holder of Opposite Party No.1 Bank.  The medical policy was obtained from Opposite Party No.3 by using the credit card and Opposite Party No.1 Bank used to remit the every years premium on the Policies to Opposite Party No.3 by debiting the amounts in his credit card.  Though, the complainant is salient with regard to period of Policy expired it is evident from the record that, the last Policy commenced from 01.10.2014 to end 30.09.2015 and for credit card holders of Opposite Party No.1 Bank the renewal of the Policy is automatic on paying of requisite premium remitted through the credit card before the expiry of Policy.  The complainant’s claim is, he paid debit amount of Rs.25,250/- on 13.01.2015 for the Policy issued for the period from 01.10.2014 to 30.09.2015 and statement of account of his credit card dated 23.01.2015 shows a credit limit of Rs.29,000/- as such, he was expecting that Opposite Party No.1 Bank will debit the premium amount for renewal of the Policy from for the period of 01.10.2015 to 30.09.2016.  The complainant has categorically stated in the complaint as well as in his evidence affidavit that the Opposite Party No.3 Company had sent a renewal notice on 14.08.2015 for renewal of the Policy for the period from October 2015 to September 2016 and he made an endorsement requesting both Opposite Party No.1 & 3 to renew the Policy.  But, in the documents exhibited by him the said renewal notice is not available.  The specific stand of Opposite Party No.1 is that an amount of Rs.24,550.60 ps., remained outstanding in the credit card account of the complainant by October 2014.  The complainant did not pay said amount as on 10.11.2014 and did not pay the said amount even in December 2014 and he paid it on 13.01.2015.  Even according to the complainant he paid the said due amount of Rs.24,550.60 ps., with interest of Rs.700/- making a total of Rs.25,250.60 ps.,  on 13.01.2015 so there is a clear admission on the part of the complainant that he defaulted in payment of the amount due for two consecutive months of November & December 2014.
13.       The stand of the complainant is for the payment due during October 2014 a statement was sent to him in November 2014 having a grace period of 15 days for payments and thereafter, if it is further delayed interest will be charged hence, he paid interest of Rs.700/- with amount due which is the nominal practice for delayed payment for credit card holders.  Infact, this is business of Bank with credit card providers to make money by way of heavy interest the credit card provider also allows credit payment of due amount and charge interest and which is reflected in the payments of account also.
14.       It is pertinent to bear in mind that the payment of interest on the amount due by the credit card holder arises when the credit card holder uses the card but, transaction for the instant case it is the bank i.e., card provider to remit the amount to the Insurance Company by debiting the same to the credit card.  By the time when the premium was payable for renewal of the Policy for the period 01.10.2014 to 30.09.2015, there was outstanding due to the credit account of the complainant.  In such, circumstances bank cannot debit premium amount and remit it to the Insurance Company for renewal of the Policy.  As already said the complainant himself has mentioned that, he received a renewal notice on 14.08.2015 for renewal of the Policy for the period from October 2015 to September 2016 then he ought to have verified the account to find out where the card provider can debit the premium amount to the card to remit the same to Insurance Company before the expiry of existing policy, but he did not do so.
15.        It is further contended by the complainant that, as per the written version of Opposite Party No.1 the credit card was closed and not renewed in December 2015 which implies and confirms that the credit card was valid and bank could have directed the Opposite Party No.3 to renew the Policy in October 2015 but as already said without remitting the premium amount the Bank cannot ask the Insurance Company to renew the Policy.  It is not in dispute that unless the premium is paid the Insurance Company will not issue the policy.  Infact, it is a settled law that the period of Insurance Policy commences on the date of payment of premium.  In the instant case since the Opposite Party No.3 Company had not received premium from Opposite Party No.1 Bank it has not renewed the Policy.
16.       It is the contention of the complainant that, the Opposite Parties by not informing him in advance before closing the credit card and by not renewing the Policy have committed act of deficiency in service.  Infact the complainant himself has that he stated received renewal notice from Opposite Party No.3 on 14.08.2015 reminding him about the expiry of Policy on 30.09.2015 and the complainant is aware that, unless the outstanding due is paid to his credit card the Bank cannot debit further amount for remitting the premium amount to Opposite Party No.3 Company. 
17.             The complainant has not paid the outstanding due and committed default for two consecutive months as such the Opposite Party Bank was constrained to close the credit card in December 2015 as such there is no deficiency in service on the part of Opposite Party No.1 to 3 to the complainant.  Accordingly, the point is answered against the complainant.             
18. Point No.2:  In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

                  Typed by Typist, corrected and pronounced by us on this the 29^th day of October, 2018.

MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

PW1                                                                                   DW1

Mr. V.Srikant                                                                        Sri Amaresh Adibatla

Power of Attorney and

authorized signatory

Exs. filed on behalf of the Complainant:

Exhibit: A-1 is copy of Intimation of ‘Medisave’ Insurance from New India Assurance Co., Ltd., dt.05.10.1993.

Exhibit: A-2 is copy of Insurance policy for 01.10.1993 to 30.09.1994, dt.01.10.2014.

Exhibit: A-3 is copy of Insurance policy for 01.10.2014 to 30.09.2015, dt.01.10.2014.

Exhibit: A-4 & 4A is copy of confirming automatic Renewal of policy, dt.15.10.2014.

Exhibit: A-5 is copy of Intimation for payments due for settlement, dt.24.10.2014.

Exhibit: A-6 is copy of Statement of A/c. confirming receipt of Payments of Rs.25,250/-, dt.13.01.2015.

Exhibit: A-7  & 7A is copy of Policy renewal notice, dated 14.09.2015.

Exhibit: A-8 & 8A is copy of requesting for renewal of policy on previous terms by endorsing on the notice, dt.20.08.2015.

Exhibit: A-9 is copy of Intimation of non-receipt of renewal policy, dt.09.01.2016.

Exhibit: A-10 is copy of Reminder to both Insurance Co., & Citi Bank, dt.12.02.2016.

Exhibit: A-11 is copy of Intimation of Non-renewal of policy for want of sufficient credit, dt.04.02.2016.

Exhibit: A-12 is copy of Intimation of closing of Credit card due to wrong e-mail, dt.24.02.2016. 

Exhibit: A-13 is copy of Intimation being verified & need more time, dt.25.02.2016.

Exhibit: A-14 is copy of Requesting for Validate credit card & also renew of Mediclaim policy cover, dt.10.03.2016.

Exhibit: A-15 is copy of Acknowledgment, dt.11.03.2016.

Exhibit: A-16 is copy of Health cover for complaint & his wife Policy, dt.21.03.2016.

Exhibit: A-17 is copy of Health cover for complaint family Policy, dt.27.03.2017.

Exhibit: A-18 is copy of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment / observation in respect of Medical renewal of Spidery, dt.23.05.2008.

Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party No.1.

Exhibit: B-1 is Statement of Account, (4 Sheets).

Exhibit: B-2 is Card Member Terms and Conditions (58 sheets).

Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party No. 3. 

Exhibit: B-3 is attested copy of the Policy No.71250034142100000013.

MEMBER                                                                                           PRESIDENT

Kps