STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

Indusind Bank Limited, SCO No. 20, Sector 16-D, Chandigarh-160016, through its Authorized Signatory

                                                                       ……Appellant

V e r s u s

Hardass Singla S/o Chiman Lal Singla, r/o H.No.764, Sector-52, Kajheri, Chandigarh. 

                                                         …….Respondent

Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against order dated 05.02.2019 passed by  District   Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T. Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint   No. 418/2018.

BEFORE:           JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT.

                             MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                    MR.RAJESH K.ARYA,MEMBER

Argued by: Mr.Arun Dogra, Advocate for the appellant.

PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT

                Appellant/Opposite Party No.1 has filed this appeal against order dated 05.02.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh (in short the Forum only), allowing a complaint filed by the respondent/complainant granting him the following relief; 

             [a]  To issue Jet Airways Vouchers worth   Rs.50,000/- to the Complainant;

 [b]  To pay Rs.7,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the unfair trade practice and harassment caused to him.

[c]    To also pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the                                        complainant as litigation expenses

The awarded amount was ordered to be paid in a time bound manner, failing which, it was to entail penal consequences.

2..              Before the Forum, it was case of the complainant that he was made to pay an amount of Rs.57,500/-  for issuance of Signature Credit Card on 27.2.2017.  It was promised that on getting above said facility, he was to get vouchers of Rs.50,000/- redeemable on Jet Airways.  After receipt of Credit Card, above promise was not fulfilled.  He visited the office of the OPs many a times, however, nothing was done. Thereafter, he sent a legal notice. Even that effort failed to yield any result. By stating as above, a prayer was made to seek refund of the amount paid with interest etc.   

3.            Record of the District Forum was received. In the complaint filed, notice was issued on 28.8.2018 for 29.10.2018 through registered post, on which date following order was passed ;

“Notice sent to OPs through registered post on 31.08.2018 has not been received back served or unserved. Since a period of more than 30 days has elapsed, therefore, OPs are presumed to have been served. None has appeared on behalf of OPs,. Hence, OPs are proceeded ex-parte.

                 Put up for filing further evidence, if any by complainant            and arguments on 20.11.2018.”

4.            The appellant/OP No.1 & OP No.2 did not appear on the date fixed and both the OPs were proceeded against ex parte and the matter was adjourned to 20.11.2018  and then to 21.12.2018. Arguments in the complaint were heard on 4.2.2019 and the judgment was pronounced on 5.2.2019, granting the relief as stated in proceedings para of this order.

5.            It has vehemently been contended by Counsel for the appellant that the order, being ex parte, be set aside and an opportunity to represent on merits, be given to the appellant. We are not satisfied with the argument raised. Not only that the report of notice sent under registered post was  not received, receipt of notice by the appellant is admitted. To say so, paragraph No.iii of grounds of appeal is reproduced here as under:

“That the impugned judgment, which has been passed ex-party against the appellant deserves to be set aside as the non-appearance of the appellant before Ld. District Forum was inadvertent and unintentional but was purely due to procedural error. The notice received in branch from the Ld. District Forum, Chandigarh was onwardly forwarded by Nodal Team to Legal and Credit Card Team, as the matter was pertaining to credit card, for necessary action, however as there was no revert therefrom, as such inadvertently the branch did not cause in appearance on the date fixed being remained under impression that the matter will be pursued by the Credit Card Team, however inadvertently due to bonafide mistake none represented the bank before Ld. District Forum. It is worthwhile to mention here that it was not in the interest of the bank to not to pursue the complaint. Since two branches of the appellant have been arrayed by the complainant in the O.Ps, as such the Ld. District Forum ought to have grant one another opportunity of appearance to the appellant, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, another opportunity be granted to the appellant to pursue the complaint in order to elucidate the truth and for just and effective decision of the complaint.”

 6.           It is admitted that the notice was received in one branch of the OP bank which is situated in the same building, however, no effort was made to put in appearance on the date fixed. Thereafter, the matter remained pending. If the appellant had failed to put in appearance on the date fixed, it could have  put in appearance on the subsequent dates when the complaint was pending for further proceedings, however, no such effort was made.  Not only as above, at the time of arguments, Counsel for the appellant has failed to show us that the order passed by the Forum below was not justified. It has come on record (annexure C-4) that for issuance of Credit Card, an amount of Rs.50000/- was charged as joining fee and further gift vouchers were promised as welcome  gift. The said brochure was issued in the name of above said appellant. If that was so, it was duty of the appellant to  get supplied promised gift.  It has rightly been noticed by the Forum that by  not giving  reply to the legal notice  and other requests  made by the complainant,  the appellant has shown deficiency in providing service.  

7.               In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the order passed by the Forum is quite justified and no case is made out to interfere in the order, under challenge. Accordingly  the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, at the preliminary stage,  with no order as to costs.   The order of the District Forum is upheld. 

8 .          Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties,    free of charge.

9.         The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.