In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.340/2010

1)                   Sri Kailash Nath Agarwal,

8A, Alipore Road, Kolkata-700027.                                                         ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   HDFC Bank Limited,

New Alipore, Kolkata-700027.

2)                   The Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Limited,

8, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata-700071.                                                 ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member

                        Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member

Order No.   20    Dated  31/12/2012.

            The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Sri Kailash Nath Agarwal against the o.ps. HDFC Bank. The case of the complainant in short is a that complainant is a retired person and is aged about 60 years old. It is further stated that the men and agents of the o.ps. approached the complainant at his residence and requested him to take a credit card. Complainant initially refused to take the said credit card but upon a lot of persuasions made by the said men and agents of o.ps. for the aforesaid purpose the complainant ultimately agreed to take the said card and upon verification of all criteria of the complainant and also being satisfied about the financial capabilities of the complainant the o.ps. provided the complainant with a credit card bearing no.5243-6811-0000-3899 and the said card was given to the complainant few years back.

            Complainant hired banking services of the o.p. no.1 by taking the aforesaid card for a consideration which has been paid out of the margin on interest earned by o.ps. and also the charges which has been taken against the issue of the said credit card from time to time and as such complainant is a consumer of o.ps. more particularly o.p. no.1 within the meaning of the term as provided in Sec 2(1)(d) of the C.P. Act, 1986.

            The aforesaid credit card account of the complainant was being maintained properly and without any disturbance from any corner till the last part of the year 2008. Needless to mention herein that the said card being issued in favour of the complainant was bearing a credit limit of an amount of Rs.1 lakh in favour of complainant and right from the last part of the year 2008 o.ps. started making problems in sending the statements to complainant. Complainant often used to receive the statement at a belated stage more particularly even after due date of the payment of the said card resulting in non payment of due amount and ultimately resulting in illegal charges of the late payment charges and the penalty.

            Complainant seeing the attitude of o.ps. more particularly the unchanged attitude of o.ps. decided to stop making payment of the dues of o.ps. till they start waiving the said illegal fine and penalty. Thereafter, o.ps. started making various false and illegal claims from time to time and the last of the said illegal claim from the side of the o.ps. was made of an amount of Rs.1,43,515.64 against he complaint.

            Complainant was waiting for a letter of settlement from the side of o.ps. in terms of his letter dt.31.8.09 so that he could make the payments of the subsequent installments in terms of the said letter but to the utter surprise and greatest dismay of the complain ant the complainant was served with a letter dt.5.6.10 written by D. Sathyaraj, advocate on behalf of o.ps. and by the said letter 5.6.10 the said ld. advocate on behalf of o.ps. made a demand of Rs.1,15,700/- leaving aside all the initial demands of o.ps.

            Complainant states and submits that the demand of o.ps. through the letter dt.5.6.10 is illegal which will appear from the various letters written from time to time to the complainant where the claim of o.ps. varied from an amount of Rs.1,43,000/- to Rs.1,15,000/- which itself shows that the demands of o.ps. from time to time have got no basis at all. B y adopting unfair means of th e trade practice o.ps. have made attempt to defraud the complainant for the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,00,00/- in the guise of recovery of the aforesaid amount of Rs.,1,43,000/- which the complainant never used.

            Complainant states and submits that the cause of action of the instant consumer dispute arose initially sometimes in the year 2008 and thereafter on various other dates including on 31.8.09 when the compromise was offered by o.ps. and finally on 5.6.10 when the demand of the illegal amount of Rs.1,15,000/- was made from the complainant illegally and the same is continuing subsisting from day to day within the territorial jurisdiction of this ld. Forum. Hence the case was filed by complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

           O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against him and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

 Decision with reasons:

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular. The specific case of the complainant in short is that complainant had a credit card with o.ps. bearing no.5243-6811-0000-3899 and he took the said card on being persuaded by o.ps. and complainant hired banking services of o.p. no.1 by taking aforesaid card for consideration which has been paid out of a margin on interest earned by the o.ps. and charges has been taken against the issue of the said card from time to time and said card was being maintained by complainant uptill 2008 and the credit limit was worth Rs.1 lakh. Further case of the complainant is that complainant used to receive statement of account at a belated stage more particularly even after due date of payment of the said card resulting in non payment of due amount and in illegal charges of late payment charges for penalty and the illegal claim of the o.ps. was Rs.1,43,515.15 as has been alleged by the complainant and there was a talk of settlement between the parties vide letter dt.31.8.09, so that complainant could make the payment on subsequent instalments in terms of the said letter and complainant was served with a letter dt.5.6.10 by an advocate of o.ps. wherefrom o.ps. demand was Rs.1,15,700 leaving aside of the initial demands of the o.ps.

            Now we find that the parties to the case vide letter issued by ld. lawyer of o.ps. dt.31.8.09 arrived at a settlement so that complainant  could make payment of the subsequent instalments in terms of the said letter, but the o.ps. did not pay heed to the terms and conditions of the said letter dt.31.8.09 and in w/v no specific denial in this regard is there on behalf of o.ps. Now we find that whilst both the parties entered into a settlement both are duty bound to abide by the same.

            In view of the above findings and on perusal of the entire materials on record we are of the views that o.ps. had deficiency in service being service provider to its consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the case is allowed on contest with cost in part against o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to give effect to their letter dt.31.8.09 and complainant be permitted to make payment of subsequent instalments in terms of the said letter dt.31.8.09 and are further directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.3000/- (Rupees three thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.

            Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.