COMPLAINT FILED: 30.10.2008<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> 11th DECEMBER 2008<br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT<br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI. A. MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO. 2323/2008<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Mr. R. Senthil Kumar,<br /> Aged about 30 years,<br /> S/o. Late S.P. Ramaswamy,<br /> Residing at No. 55, 4th Main,<br /> Maruthi HBCS Layout,<br /> BTM Ist Stage,<br /> Bangalore – 560 029.<br /> <br /> Advocate (K. Vijay Kumar)<br /> <br /> <br /> V/s.<br /> <br /> <br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. M/s. HDFC Bank Ltd.,<br /> Credit Cards Division,<br /> P.O. Box 8654,<br /> Thiruvanmiur,<br /> Chennai – 600 041.<br /> Represented by its Manager.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. HDFC Bank Ltd.,<br /> Credit Card Division,<br /> Ramon House, 6th Floor,<br /> 169, Backbay Reclamation,<br /> Mumbai – 400 020.<br /> Represented by its Manager.<br /> <br /> <br /> 3. M/s. HDFC Bank Ltd.,<br /> Credit Cards Division,<br /> Customer Cards Division,<br /> P.O. Box 8645,<br /> Thirvanmiyar P.O.<br /> Chennai – 600 041.<br /> Manager-grievance cell.<br /> <br /> Advocate (V. Suresh)<br /> <br /> <br /> 4. Lakshmi Jewelry,<br /> #418/1, Raghavendra Complex,<br /> 10th main, 4th Block,<br /> Jayanagar,<br /> Bangalore,<br /> Represented by its Manager.<br /> <br /> Advocate (V.B. Shiva Kumar)<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to reverse the outstanding amount and close both gold card and platinum card and pay a compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and for such other reliefs on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> Complainant is the holder of the gold credit card of the OP with a credit limit of Rs.40,000/-. In the month of May 2008 as per the request of the OP the said gold card was converted into platinum plus master credit card and whatever the balance due pending with respect to gold credit card have been transferred to platinum plus master credit card, platinum plus master card was issued to complainant on 04.06.2008. It is expected that on the same day gold credit card is to be deactivated. But when complainant checked his accounts he noticed that an amount of Rs.48,000/- is transacted on the basis of the gold credit card on 20.06.2008 with some Lakshmi Jewelry. When the gold card is deactivated on 04.06.2008 there is no scope for operating the same. The jewelry mart OP.4 has not verified the genuineness of the said card as well as the signatures, identity proof, mechanically accepted it. For no fault of the complainant, he was made to suffer both mental agony and financial loss. His repeated requests and demands made to OP to rectify the said mistake, went in vain. He even lodged a police complaint to Mico Layout Police Station regarding the lost of his gold credit card. With all that OP made a demand of Rs.53,825/- vide notice dated 04.09.2008. The arbitrary act of the OP amounts to deficiency in service. When complainant has not at all transacted with OP.4 he is not liable to pay the said amount. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the relief accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version denying all the allegations made by the complainant in toto. The defence set out by all the OP’s is almost same and identical. According to OP.1 to 3 the platinum master credit card which was issued to complainant bearing No. 5243681100849143 has been lost by the complainant on 26.06.2008. Under the circumstances the said card was blocked and the fresh card bearing No. 5243681100896748 is issued, which is in active status. Complainant transacted with OP.4 by utilizing the said card. Under such circumstances he is liable to pay the said amount. The so called card which is alleged to have been lost by the complainant is platinum master credit card No. 5243681100849143 and not the gold credit card as alleged by the complainant bearing No. 5243681100849143. Though complainant is aware of the said fact he has suppressed to mention the same. So the approach of the complainant is not fair and honest. OP.4 has verified the signature of the credit card holder as per the rules, accepted the same and allowed the transaction. Under such circumstances complainant is bound to pay the said amount to OP.1 to 3. When complainant failed to make payment of the said amount, OP has a right to impose the interest as per the agreement and contract. So complainant is in due of Rs.53,825.18 and that demand does not amounts to deficiency in service. The entire complaint is devoid of merits. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <br /> entitled for the reliefs now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Negative<br /> Point No.2:- Negative<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. At the outset it is not at dispute that the complainant is the credit card holder of OP.1 to 3 having credit card limit of Rs.40,000/- and thereafter in the month of May 2008 he got it converted into platinum plus credit card and it was activated on 04.06.2008. It is the contention of the complainant that whatever the balance and the dues pending pertaining to gold credit card were transferred to platinum plus credit card. It is further contended by the complainant that OP is expected to deactivate the gold credit card from 04.06.2008. But to his utter shock and surprise when he checked his account on 26.06.2008 it has came to his knowledge that by using the gold credit card a transaction worth of Rs.48,000/- was done with OP.4 on 20.06.2008. Actually the said gold credit card was deactivated long back. He immediately contacted the OP about the said mistake crept in. But there was no proper response from the OP.<br /> <br /> 7. It is further contended by the complainant that he lodged complaint to the jurisdictional Police with regard to the loss of gold credit card. What has happened to the said complaint is not known. With all that OP made a claim of Rs.53,825/- by causing a notice dated 04.09.2008. Hence he felt the deficiency in service. As against this it is specifically contended by the OP that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and there is a suppression of material facts which are well within his knowledge. According to the OP the earlier platinum card bearing No. 5243681100849143 alleged to have been lost by the complainant. Hence OP issued the another master platinum credit card bearing No. 5243681100896748. Unfortunately this is not pleaded by the complainant, though he is aware of the same. It is further contended by the OP that by using the said subsequent platinum master credit card a transaction was done with OP.4 to the tune of Rs.48,000/-. The documents produced by the OP supports the said fact. The contents of the said documents are not disputed or denied by the complainant.<br /> <br /> 8. Complainant wants to breathe hot and cold to the reasons best known to him. According to the complainant he lost the gold credit card, but it is not so. The complaint lodged to the Police refers to master credit card No. 5243681100849143. OP.4 having verified the signature of the credit card holder as per the rules accepted the transaction on 20.06.2008, though complainant done the said transaction on 20.06.2008 but still to the reasons best known to him he has come up with this false allegation that for the first time he came to know of the said transaction on 26.06.2008, which is on the face of it appears to be not correct. <br /> <br /> 9. We are satisfied that there is a proper use of the said platinum card by the card holder. When that is so, OP.1 to 3 have got a right to claim the transacted amount of Rs.48,000/- plus interest in all to the tune of Rs.53,000/- and odd. That act of the OP cannot be termed as deficiency in service. Under such circumstances we find the complaint appears to be devoid of merits. There is no proof of deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence the complainant is not entitled for the relief claimed. Accordingly we answer point nos.1 and 2 in negative and proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is dismissed. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 11th day of December 2008.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> p.n.g. <br /> <br />