BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 384/2003 Filed on 25.09.2003

Dated : 30.09.2009

Complainant:

V. Sundaresan, ONIDA Customer Relations Centre, T.C 28/943, Kalpalathika, Kaithamukku, Thiruvananthapuram – 23.

(By adv. Issac Samuel)

Opposite parties:

1. City Bank N.A, Card Member Services, Post Box No. 4830, Anna Salai P.O, Chennai – 600 002.

    

   (By adv. M.S. Nizar)

    

2. The Manager, Sabol Business Centre, A9/1238, Kunnil Compound, CPGP Lane, Sasthamangalam, Thiruvananthapuram.

This complaint is disposed of after the period so specified under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Though the case was taken up for orders by the predecessors of this Forum on 11.08.2004, the order was not prepared accordingly. This Forum assumed office on 08.02.2008. This O.P having been taken as heard on 31.08.2009, the Forum on 30.09.2009 delivered the following:

ORDER

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT

The facts leading to the filing of the complaint are that complainant is a Citi Bank card holder with Account No. 5546199729049007, that 1^st opposite party issued the Citi Bank Card and 2^nd opposite party is the authorized collection centre of the 1^st opposite party, that on 20.03.2003 complainant received a letter dated 18.03.2003 from the opposite parties stating that an amount of Rs. 9,673.35 is outstanding and the bank is going to withdraw all facilities on the card including charge facility and directed the complainant not to use the card, that complainant immediately contacted the 2^nd opposite party and demanded a detailed statement of account and surrendered his card, that 2^nd opposite party on verification of accounts stated that a sum of Rs. 6,000/- was due from the complainant on account of Citi Bank card transaction and that complainant immediately paid Rs. 6,000/- on 17.05.2003 to 2^nd opposite party and 2^nd opposite party issued a reply to the complainant in full and final settlement of the dues. On 18.06.2003 1^st opposite party issued a statement of account demanding payment of Rs. 5,671.90 from the complainant. Complainant issued a legal notice to 1^st opposite party stating that complainant has surrendered his card and cleared all his outstanding dues on account of his card transaction on 17.05.2003. There is clear negligence and deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint to direct the opposite parties to withdraw the statement dated 16.08.2003 and 17.09.2003 and to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to complainant.

1^st opposite party filed version contending that complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Complainant is a City Bank card holder with Account No. 5546199729049007. The service for the credit card was availed by the complainant with credit limit of Rs. 15,000/- during the period from 17.02.2003 to 16.03.2003. The total amount outstanding was Rs. 9,673.35. Opposite party had issued a letter dated 18.03.2003 to clear off the entire amount outstanding. On receipt of the notice complainant never sent any reply nor effected any payment. 1^st opposite party was also not intimated as to the surrendering of the card by the complainant. 2^nd opposite party is a franchisee and accounts are operated only by the 1^st opposite party. 1^st opposite party had deducted Rs. 6,000/- already remitted by the complainant to 2^nd opposite party and balance amount inclusive of service charges became Rs. 4,342.96 which became Rs. 4,667.91 as on 18.06.2003. There is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of 1^st opposite party for demanding the outstanding amount due to them. Hence 1^st opposite party prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

2^nd opposite party did not turn up inspite of service of notice. No version filed. Hence 2^nd opposite party remained ex-parte.

The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant is bound to pay any amount in regard to credit card No. 5546199729049007?

2. Whether there has been deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

3. Whether the complainant is entitled to get compensation & cost?

In support of the complaint, complainant has filed proof affidavit and Exts. P1 to P8 were marked. Complainant has been cross examined by the opposite parties. In rebuttal, opposite parties did not file affidavit. 1^st opposite party had filed 4 documents which were marked as Exts. D1 to D4.

Points (i) to (iii):- Admittedly, complainant is a City Bank Credit card holder with account No. 5546199729049007. It has been the case of the complainant that on 20.03.2003 complainant received a letter dated 18.03.2003 from the opposite party stating that an amount of Rs. 9673.35 is outstanding, that the bank is going to withdraw all facilities on the card including charge facility and directed the complainant not to use the card, that the complainant immediately contacted 2^nd opposite party and demanded a detailed statement of accounts and surrendered his card, that 2^nd opposite party on verification of accounts stated that a sum of Rs. 6000/- was due from the complainant and that complainant paid Rs. 6,000/- on 17.05.2003 to 2^nd opposite party and obtained receipt in full and final settlement of dues. It has also been the case of the complainant that on 18.06.2003, 1^st opposite party issued a statement of account demanding payment of Rs. 4667.91. The stand of 1^st opposite party is that 2^nd opposite party is a franchise and the accounts are operated by the 1^st opposite party, that 1^st opposite party had already demanded an amount of Rs. 9,673.35 as on 18.03.2003 and on 17.05.2003 an amount of Rs. 6000/- was received from the complainant towards the outstanding amount of Rs. 10,120.97, and the balance carried forward along with service charges, late payment and fee and service tax, which became Rs. 4,667.91 as on 18.06.2003. Ext. P1 is the letter dated 18.03.2003 addressed to the complainant by the 1^st opposite party informing him that 1^st opposite party has been constrained to withdraw all facilities on his credit card including his charge facility because of non-payment of overdue amounts against his card. It is seen stated that outstanding is Rs. 9,673.35. Ext. P2 series includes statements dated 17.02.2003, 17.03.2003 and 18.04.2003. As per statement dated 17.02.2003 previous balance is Rs. 8064.68 and activity since last statement includes service charges: Rs. 218/-, late payment fee: Rs. 175/- and service tax at 5%: Rs. 19.65. As per statement dated 17.03.2003 previous balance is Rs. 8477.33 and activity since last statement includes renewal fee from April 03 to March 04 of Rs. 7.50, service charges-Rs. 214.07, late payment fee-Rs. 175/- and service tax @5%- Rs. 5695/-. As per statement dated 18.04.2003 previous balance is Rs. 9673.35 and activity since last statement includes service charge-Rs. 251.30, late payment fee-Rs. 175/- and service tax @ 5%-Rs. 21.32 and minimum amount due is Rs. 10120.97. Ext. P3 is the payment receipt dated 17.05.2003 issued by the 2^nd opposite party for Rs. 6,000/-. At the bottom of the Ext. P3 it is written as full and final settlement Rs. 6,000/-. Ext. P4 is statement of account dated 18.06.2003 demanding Rs. 4667.93. Ext. P5 is the copy of the advocate notice dated 07.07.2003 sent to opposite parties requesting to withdraw Ext. P5 demands. Ext. P6 series include postal receipts and acknowledgement cards. Ext. P7 is statement of account dated 16.08.2003 demanding Rs. 5324.99. Ext. P8 is the statement of account dated 17.03.2004. As per Ext. P8 minimum amount of dues is Rs. 0.00. It is seen stated under activity since last statement column that charge revised Rs. 4120.97 CR fee revised Rs. 2127.81 CR and fee revised Rs. 2127.81 CR and charge revised Rs. 1484.96 CR. 1^st opposite party did not file affidavit to substantiate the contention in the version. It is admitted by the 1^st opposite party that 2^nd opposite party is the franchisee and that Rs. 6,000/- remitted on 17.05.2003 by the complainant also received by the 1^st opposite party. It is pertinent to point out that in Ext. P3 the said amount of Rs. 6,000/- is seen remitted by the complainant in full and final settlement. Hence the issuance of further statements of account to complainant by the 1^st opposite party demanding further amounts are against the spirit and contents of Ext. P3. Further in Ext. P8 1^st opposite party had revised all charges and fee and revalued the due as Rs. 0.00. Ext. P8 is seen issued after filing of the version by the 1^st opposite party. In view of the foregoing discussions and in the light of evidence available on records, we hold that complainant is not bound to pay any amount towards 1^st opposite party in relation to the said credit card vide statement of accounts issued after the issuance of Ext. P3 receipt.

In the result, complaint is allowed. Complainant is not bound to pay any amount in regard to the aforesaid credit card. It is hereby declared that opposite parties are estopped from claiming any amount from the complainant after execution of Ext. P3 receipt in full and final settlement in regard to Credit Card No. 5546199729049007. There will be no compensation in facts and circumstances of the case. Both parties are left to bear and suffer their own costs.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of September 2009.

G. SIVAPRASAD,

President.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

O.P. No. 384/2003

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

PW1 - V. Sundaresan

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Letter dated 18.03.2003 issued to the complainant by 1^st

opposite party.

P2 - Statement of account dated 17.02.2003, 17.03.2003,

18.04.2003 and photocopy of statement of accounts dated

18.06.2003, 16.08.2003, 17.09.2003.

P3 - Repayment receipt No. SBC 12539 dated 17.05.2003 for

Rs. 6,000/-.

P4 - Statement of account dated 18.06.2003 issued to the

complainant.

P5 - Copy of advocate notice dated 07.07.2003.

P6 - Postal receipts(2 Nos) and acknowledgement cards (2 Nos)

P7 - Statement of account dated 16.08.2003 and 17.09.2003.

P8 - Statement of accounts dated 17.03.2004.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT