For the Complainant                      -Mr. Prasanta Banerjee, Advocate

For the OP                                        - Smt. Tuhina Das (Chaudhury), Advocate

FINAL ORDER/JUDGEMENT

SHRI SWAPAN KUMAR MAHANTY, PRESIDENT

This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986.

Brief facts, as stated in the consumer complaint, are that complainant is the holder of an account being No.50100109852180 with OP/Bank at its Mallick Bazar Branch, Kolkata and a Credit Card being No.4346771005874061 was also given to the complainant.  Complainant purchased articles and paid the value of articles against bills raised / issued by the OP. In terms of settlement, complainant paid outstanding dues of Rs.20,500/- to the OP. Despite payment of outstanding dues the  OP illegally deducted Rs.20,500/- from his account. Complainant approached the OP/Bank for resolving   the issue. However, it did not yield any positive result. Finding no other alternative, complainant issued legal notice dated 23.04.2018 to the OP ventilating his grievance. OP did not redress his grievance. Being aggrieved against the activities of the OP, the complainant approached this Forum by way of consumer complainant.

Upon notice, the OP in their written version filed through their Authorized Signatory Anirban Sur took the objection that the consumer complaint is barred by limitation under Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The specific case of the OP is that the complainant approached the OP/bank for availing credit card and the bank issued a credit card bearing No.4346771005874061 to him. The said credit card was governed by the Card Member Agreement and the complainant is bound to accept the terms & conditions of the said Card Member Agreement. Complainant extensively used the said credit card. The OP Bank regularly raised statements to the complainant. In spite of receiving statement of accounts, complainant failed and neglected to clear the entire outstanding dues and he is a habitual defaulter. Several reminders were given to the complainant but he did not clear the dues. Ultimately, complainant approached the OP/Bank for one time settlement of the outstanding dues under the subject credit card and the OP vide letter dated 16.11.2007 intimated the complainant regarding terms & conditions of the settlement. In the said settlement letter, it was specifically mentioned that in the event of repayment schedule is not being adhered to and any of the cheques got dishonored, this settlement offer would be rendered null and void and the complainant would be required to pay the entire outstanding amount ”. Complainant has failed to make the settlement as per terms of settlement letter dated 16.11.2007. Thus, the settlement became null and void. The payment made by the complainant has been adjusted towards the entire outstanding dues under the subject Credit Card. The OP / Bank have acted as per the terms of the agreement. On the contrary, the complainant has violated the terms of agreement. Thus, the OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.

The only point  that falls for consideration whether there was  any deficiency in service  on the part of the OP and the complainant  is entitled to refund Rs.20,500/- including compensation and litigation cost  as alleged.

Decision with Reasons

Both parties have tendered examination in chief through affidavit in support of their respective case. They have also filed Brief Notes of Arguments.

We have heard the learned Advocate for the parties and have also carefully perused the consumer complaint, written version, evidence and documents on record.

The admitted facts of the case are that the OP/Bank issued a credit card bearing No434677100-5874061 to the complainant and the said credit card is governed by the Card Member Agreement. It is also true that the complainant used the said credit card and received statements from the OP.

The grievance of the complainant is that despite liquidation of entire outstanding amount of Rs.20,500/-, the OP again deducted such amount from his Account No. 50100109852180 illegally. The OP /Bank did not credit such amount to his account despite several requests and legal notice dated 23.04.2018.

Per-contra, the OP denied the grievance of the complainant and candidly stated in the W.V that, the complainant has failed and neglected to liquidate the outstanding amount in terms of settlement letter dated 16.11.2007. Thus, the OP/Bank in exercise of its right under the Card Member Agreement as well as under Section 171 of the Indian Contract Act,1872 deducted the lien amount from the account of the complainant  towards the outstanding amount of the Credit Card.

It is not in dispute that according to the request of the complainant, OP issued amicable settlement letter dated 16.11.2007 to the complainant. On going through  the copy of settlement letter, we find that settlement amount  was Rs.20,500/- against Credit Card No. 434677100587406, tenure of repayment of settlement amount was eight, mode of settlement amount was eight and mode of settlement is as follows :

The settlement letter dated 16.11.2007 specifically mentioned the terms and conditions of settlement. It is absolutely clear from the said settlement letter that “ In the event  of the above repayment schedule not being adhered to and any of the cheques not being honored, this settlement offer would be rendered  null and void and the complainant  / Card Holder would be required to pay the entire outstanding at that point of time.” The OP/Bank also reserves the right to initiate legal action on the dishonored cheques.

It is not in dispute that complainant failed to make settlement amount for the month of February, 2008 and April, 2008 in terms of the settlement letter. Thus, the settlement became null and void. Parties are bound by the terms of settlement. A person who signs a document contain certain contractual terms is normally bound by them even though he is ignorant of their precise legal effect. Complainant accepted the settlement letter by putting his signature thereon. Thus, he is bound to fulfill the terms & conditions of the settlement. Complainant failed to do so, certainly the settlement became null and void. Therefore, the OP / Bank have every right to exercise its right under the Card Member Agreement and U/s 171 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 to deduct the lien amount from the account of the complainant towards the outstanding amount of Credit Card. In our opinion, there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP/Bank. Thus, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for.

In the result, the case merit fails.

Hence,

Ordered

            That the consumer case be and the same is dismissed on contest against the OP with no order as to costs.

            The complainant is attempting to misuse the statutory process provided for better protection of the interest of consumers. Thus, the complainant is directed to deposit cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) only to the State Consumer Welfare Fund, W.B. within four weeks, failing which, interest @ 6% per annum has to be paid by the complainant till realization.