Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/639/2013

Vipin Jain - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Ramneek Sharma

28 Sep 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA   NAGAR.

 

                                                     Complaint No.639/2013.

                                                     Date of institution: 03.09.2013.

                                                     Date of decision: 28.09.2017..

Vipan Jain, age 48 years, son of Shri Pal Jain, r/o H.No.1793, Ward No.2, Civil Line, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                     

                                                                                                   …Complainant.

                        Versus

1. HDFC Bank Ltd., Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar through its Branch Manager.
2. HDFC Credit Card Division, SCF 50/51, Ist floor, Phase 3B-2, Mohali-160059, Punjab through its Manager.

….Respondents.

BEFORE     SH. SATPAL, PRESIDENT

                    SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

                    SMT.VEENA RANI SHEOKAND, MEMBER.

 

Present:     Sh. Ramneek Sharma, Advocate, for complainant.   

                Sh. K.K.Gupta, Advocate for the OPs.

               

                ORDER

         

(SATPAL, PRESIDENT)

                The complainant-Vipan Jain has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986, as amended up to date (hereinafter respondents will be referred as OPs). 

2.             Brief facts of the complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that he was having account No.08721000012462 with the Op No.1 and he has availed the credit card facility from the Ops under credit card No.552088000040001.  It is alleged that the complainant has availed the said credit facility only for initial six months and deposited an outstanding amount to the tune of Rs.1780/- on 09.04.2012 and thereafter, nothing was outstanding against the complainant.  It is alleged that the complainant moved an application on 09.04.2012 with the Ops to close/cancel the said credit card.  It is further alleged that the complainant received legal notices dt. 17.10.2012, 25.01.2013 from one Gagan Deep Tony, Adv. regarding recovery of Rs.13,952.61 paise and thereafter, a legal notice from Sh. Anil Sheoran, Adv. regarding payment of Rs.18,474.66 paise, a legal notice for sum of Rs.22,424.98 paise and lastly a legal notice for a sum of Rs.24,114/-.  The Ops have unautorizedly debited the amount from the account of complainant and illegally issued some policies also and they deducted the amount of insurance policies from the account of complainant for which they never issued/sent any policy to the complainant.  So, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of Ops and prayed for acceptance of complaint with the direction to Ops to set-aside the amount of Rs.24,114/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. from 15.07.2013 and to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of harassment and mental agony as-well-as Rs.5500/- as litigation charges.  Hence, this complaint.

3.            Upon notice, the OPs appeared and filed their written statement raising preliminary objections with regard to locus-standi; maintainability; cause of action; that the true facts are that the complainant himself had approached the Ops and requested to issue the credit card and prior to issuance of the said card, all the terms and conditions were narrated to him.  It is further stated that the timely payment towards the card dues is essential and it is a condition of card agreement that all the payments towards minimum amount due must reach to HDFC Bank on or before the payment due date indicated in the monthly statement of account.  The complainant is aware of all the terms & conditions which are written in the card member agreement & in MITC and even the same is mentioned on the back portion of card statement of account dispatched to customer on monthly basis.  It is further stated that in the month of April, 2012 the complainant wanted to close his credit card & policies and at that time a sum of Rs.8587.61 paise was outstanding against the complainant.  The complainant has himself remained failed to deposit the outstanding amount due against the said policies and now a sum of Rs.25,167.19 paise as on 02.01.2014 is due against him.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops.  On merits, the objections raised in the preliminary objections are reiterated and so, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

4.             Ld. Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of the complainant as Annexure-CW/A and documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C8 and closed evidence on behalf of complainant. 

5.             On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the Ops tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. Aman Gupta, Manager as Annexure-RW/A alongwith documents Annexure-R1 to Annexure-R30 and closed evidence on behalf of Ops.    

6.             We have heard the ld. Counsel for both the parties and perused the record carefully and minutely.       

7.             It is admitted that the complainant was having a credit card facility of Ops bank.  It is also not disputed that the aforesaid facility was withdrawn by the complainant on 09.04.2012.  The controversy between the parties is that whether the complainant is liable to pay the outstanding amount of credit card facility of Ops or not?  The version of the complainant is that he had withdrawn the credit card facility on 09.04.2012 and cleared all the outstanding amount on 09.04.2012, whereas the version of the Ops is that the complainant has not cleared the outstanding amount on 09.04.2012 and an amount of Rs.8587.61 paise was outstanding on credit card account of the pre-closure premium of two policies.  The complainant has taken two insurance policies from HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co. Ltd. i.e. one Health Suraksha Policy (Silver plan) and Sarv Suraksha Advantage Insurance Policy, the monthly premium of both the policies was to the tune of Rs.732.42 paise and Rs.574.92 paise respectively and as such, the complainant is liable to pay the premium of the said policies.  The complainant has pre-closed the aforesaid credit card policies on 09.04.2012 as per Annexure-C1 and as such, the complainant is only liable to make the payment of the premium upto 09.04.2012.  It is admitted by the Ops in their written statement in para No.2 on merits that an amount of Rs.8587.61 paise was outstanding on credit card account of the pre-closure premium of the above-said policies.  Hence, the complainant is liable to pay the aforesaid amount only because he closed the credit card facility on 09.04.2012.

8.             Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, we partly allow the complaint with the direction to the complainant to deposit an amount of Rs.8587.61 with the Ops alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. from 09.04.2012 till its deposit.  Further the Ops are directed to issue no objection certificate to the complainant if the complainant deposit the aforesaid amount.  No order as to costs.  Copy of said order be supplied to the parties free of cost.  File be consigned to record-room after due compliance.  

Announced in open court:

Dated: 28.09.2017.

                                                           (SATPAL)

                                                           PRESIDENT.

 

 

(VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)         (S.C.SHARMA)

MEMBER                                          MEMBER