Maharashtra

Central Mumbai

CC/16/44

MRS NEHA PRAMODKUMAR MUNDHRA - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC BANK LIMITED CARDS DIVISION - Opp.Party(s)

SHRI DHARMENDRA DAMANI

30 Nov 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CENTRAL MUMBAI
Puravatha Bhavan, 2nd Floor, General Nagesh Marg, Near Mahatma Gandhi Hospital
Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Phone No. 022-2417 1360
Website- www.confonet.nic.in
 
Complaint Case No. CC/16/44
 
1. MRS NEHA PRAMODKUMAR MUNDHRA
A/502, ORCHID SWUBURBIA, LINK ROAD, KANDIVALI WEST
MUMBAI-400 067
MAHARASHTRA STATE
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. HDFC BANK LIMITED CARDS DIVISION
HDFC BAK HOUSE, SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL WEST
MUMBAI-400 013
MAHARASHTRA STATE
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. H.K.BHAISE MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 30 Nov 2016
Final Order / Judgement

PER MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)          The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant, she is holding credit card with opponent bank.  She used her credit card for booking rooms of hotel Geroldswill Swiss Quality in Zurich, Switzerland for the stay of her husband Mr.Arpit Khattod on 01/10/2015 to 03/10/2015.  The booking was done on or before 21/09/2015 through website.  Her husband checked in to the hotel 01/10/2015 and left the hotel on 03/10/2015 at 7.30 a.m.  He went to Zurich Airport by train and boarded the flight for Greece.  It was departed at 11.00 a.m.  The complainant received SMS on her registered mobile from opponent on 03/10/2015 that her card was transacted for 1500 Swiss Francs on 03/10/2015 at 9.54.41 a.m. for INR 102,213.86.  It is shown in the credit card statement dated 08/10/2015.  Her husband already checked out the hotel at 7.30 a.m. The amount was misappropriated by opponent thereafter.  The complainant contacted Grievance Cell of opponent and reported the unauthorized transaction.  Except the disputed transaction amount the complainant paid the balance amount as per credit card statement.  In spite of several request the opponent has not settled the disputed transaction.  On the other hand opponent freezed the saving account of complainant and misappropriated the amount of Rs.13126 from her saving account.   In spite of several request and notices the opponent has not settled the dispute therefore the complainant has filed this complaint to direct the opponent to reverse the amount illegally charged on the credit card and unfreeze the saving bank account. She has also claimed damaged of Rs.10,00,000/- and  legal expenses of Rs.1,00,000/-. 

2)           The opponent remained absent though duly served therefore matter was proceeded exparte against the opponent.  The opponent challenged the exparte order before Hon’ble State Commission vide Revision Petition No.16/129 and the Hon’ble State Commission dismissed the Revision Petition vide order dated 31/08/2016. 

3)           The complainant has filed affidavit of evidence in support of her claim and also produced copies of documents and correspondence.  The evidence on record is sufficient to show that the complainant is holding credit card issued by opponent.  The evidence shows that her husband checked out the hotel at 7.30 a.m. and boarded the flight for Greece.  Thereafter the amount was misappropriated from the credit card of the complainant.  The contents of complaint and the evidence on record are not challenged by the opponent. Therefore we are accepting it.  The opponent did not bother to file its say after receiving the copy of complaint.  Even the opponent did not bother to challenge the evidence on record and argue the matter on merit.  Therefore adverse inference can withdraw against the opponent.  The evidence on record is sufficient to show that the amount of INR 102,213.86/- is unauthorizely shown in the statement of credit card.  The complainant is not liable to pay this amount and other charges in respect of this transaction, to the opponent.  It is necessary to direct the opponent to reverse this amount and other charges in respect of this transaction and also to unfreeze the saving bank account of the complainant.  The complainant has claimed damages of Rs.10,00,000/- for causing loss to the business of her husband. There is no such evidence on record showing the loss of business.  Therefore the complainant is not entitled for such damages.  However, the complainant is entitled for litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint is partly allowed.

2. The Opponent is directed to reverse amount of INR 1,02,213.86/- (One lakh Two thousand Two hundred thirteen Eighty six paise Only) and other charges in respect of this transaction and unfreeze the saving bank account of the  complainant.

3. The Opponent is further directed to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this proceeding.

 

4. The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.

5. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.

Pronounced on 30th November, 2016

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. B.S.WASEKAR]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. H.K.BHAISE]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.