Punjab

Rupnagar

RBT/CC/18/165

Kunal Dev Malhotra - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

SS Bhatia

02 Jan 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CAMP COURT AT LUDHIANA

 

                                                RBT/Consumer Complaint No. 165 of 09.03.2018

                                                Date of Decision: 02.01.2023

 

          Kunal Dev Malohtra aged about 34 years son of Shri Vas Dev Malohtra, resident of House No.63, JJ enclave, Phase 3, Dugri, Ludhiana  

                                                                                       ……Complainant

                                                         Versus

1. HDFC Bank, Phase I, Dugri, Ludhiana through its Branch Manager 
2. Kulwinder Singh Head of Credit Card Department, Branch Dugri, Phase II,  Ludhiana 

                                                                                          ….Opposite Parties

Complaint under Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM:-

                             SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

                             SMT. RANVIR KAUR, MEMBER

 

ARGUED BY:-

                             Sh. S.S. Bhatia, Adv. For complainant

                             Sh. Rahul Rajput, Adv. for OPs.

 

ORDER:-

SH. RANJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

The present order of ours will dispose of the above complaint received by way of transfer from District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana, filed under Consumer Protection Act, by the complainant against the opposite parties on the ground that the complainant is having current account holder bearing no. 18312000000871 and saving account no. 50100040965111 with the opposite parties and officials of the opposite parties approached the complainant and told the complainant that the complainant being good customers is eligible fr credit card and also offered credit card to the complainant and further assured the complainant that his facility of credit card is very good and is very securable and further assured that if any problem shall be taken place in the said credit card they will solve on priority basis. On the assurance given by the opposite parties, the complainant availed the service of the opposite party. Thereafter opposite parties issued credit card to the complainant vide credit card no. 5337440610016132 Add on connection in the name of kavita Malhotra having credit limit Rs. 2,65,000/-. Thereafter the complainant used the said credit card as per his facility and started making the payment as per its usage. On 29.07.2017, the complainant made payment of Rs. 1,60,000/- to country Holiday in Membership through his above said credit card at park plaza, Ludhiana through net. Banking. The complainant has received one telephone call from the opposite parties that complainant has used the credit card at Dubai and made following transactions:

                         Amount                    Dated:

Rs. 3491.87p             26/7/2017

Rs. 52805.59p          28/7/2017

Rs. 2182.05p            29/7/2017

Rs. 54097.36p2         9/7/2017

 

The complainant shocked after receiving the said call and requested that he has not used ATM Card in Dubai and never made an transactions as stated above and he is living at Ludhiana and never visited Dubai at that time. Even on 29/7/2017 the complainant was present at park plaza, Ludhiana and made payment as stated above. Thereafter the complainant immediately blocked his credit card by making complaint to customer care of the opposite party and then customer care of the opposite party that they will issue new credit card and will settle the matter. Thereafter immediately the complainant visited the office of opposite party and moved written complaint and thereafter opposite provide the detail regarding using of the ATM Card. Copy of the same attached and also send the mail to the complainant. Thereafter opposite party has send false and vague reply to the complainant. Same are Annexure 1 to 3.On 7/8/2017 the opposite party again sent another mail giving detail of transaction and ultimately the opposite party has issued new ATM Card bearing No. 5337440610019231 and again the complainant started using it. Thereafter the opposite party no. 2 made call to the complainant. That if the complainant will deposit some amount then the opposite parties will settle the claim with the complainant and on the assurance the complainant deposited the following payment:

Amount         Dated:

35000           14/8/2017

15000            14/9/2017

20000             16/10/2017

6000               27/11/2017

20800             23/1/2018

 

Out of the said amount the opposite party has reversed the amount of Rs. 3491/- dated 26/7/2017 and further assured that they will reversed the payment soon to the account of the complainant. The complainant believed on the representation of the opposite parties. The complainant approached the opposite parties with request to settle claim as stated above but the opposite parties always linger on the matter on one pretext or other. The complainant also send various email including mail dated 5/2/2018, 3/3/2018. The opposite parties have not settled the claim and ultimately the opposite parties instead of settling the claim with the complainant and to paying the amount to the claimant, made false outstanding against the complainant. Thereafter the intention of the opposite parties have become dishonest and they instead of making the payment to the complainant and to settle the claim with the complainant started deducted the amount from the other account of the complainant and also freeze theaccount of the complainant. Infact an amount of Rs. 84604.83 is lying in current account and Rs. 12000/- in saving account as mentioned in the para no.1. Due to illegally freezing the account of the complainant, the complainant suffered great hardship from the hands of the opposite parties because the complainant has taken various loan facilities and amount of instalment has been deducted from the above said account and complainant is also running his business on the basis of the above said account and due to freezing of the above said account the complainant is unable to run his business and suffering loss due which is unaccountable. Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant sought the following reliefs against the OPs:-

1. To refund Rs.1,12,575/- which has been deducted from the account of the complainant
2. To pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation
3. To pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation expenses.  
2. contents of complaint are false, frivolous and vexatious in nature, as such the complaint is neither tenable in law nor on facts. Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed in limine; that the complaint had suppressed several material facts from the Hon’ble Forum and has not approached this Hon’ble Court with clean hands; that expect all the allegations and averments stated to be true herein below, all the allegations and averments made in the complaint are not true and correct and the same are denied in entirety by the respondent, as if the same are specifically and categorically traversed herewith; that the present reply is filed through its authorized signatory surinder singh who is authorized to file the present reply and more he is well conversant with the facts of present case; that the complainant approached the respondents for the issued of credit card and at the time of issuing the credit card the complainant signed the application form as well as terms and conditions after reading the understanding the same. It I further mentioned that respondents has a right to levied schedule of charges applicable from time to time. It is pertinent to mention here that complainant appended his signatures after understanding the same. Annexure-1 (application form signed by the complainant); that the respondents as per the terms and conditions issued the statement on monthly basis showing the transaction description done by the complainant and moreover at the time of doing the transaction respondents informed the complainant telephonically as well as through SMS but the complainant never raised the objections towards the amount debited against the credit card issued to complainant, in fact complainant made the payments through his credit card and the amount standing towards his credit card as per the statement by the respondent is true and correct; that the complainant is not a consumer ad defined under the consumer Act; that the respondents submit that there is no deficiency of services on the part of the respondents and the complaint is vague in as much as does not state what is the deficiency on the part of the respondents. It is further prayed that no loss is suffered by the complainant because of the respondents and the complainant is not entitled to any relief or compensation as prayed in the instant complaint and it shall be dismissed with costs. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant is having current account and saving account with the opposite parties. It is incorrect that the officials of the opposite parties approached the complainant. The complainant himself approached the opposite party i.e. the bank for opening the credit card facility and on the asking of the complainant, the officials of opposite party no. 1 opened the credit facility. At the time of opening the credit card facility the complainant agreed the terms and conditions of the bank and thereafter he signed the application form as well as the terns and conditions of the issuing of credit card. It is incorrect that on the assurance given by the opposite parties, the complainant availed the services of opposite parties as alleged. It is also admitted that the opposite parties issued credit card to the complainant vide credit card no. 5337440610016132 Add on connection in the name of Kavita Malhotra having credit limit of Rs. 2, 65,000/- .It is stated that the complaint has used the credit card at Dubai and made the transactions as mentioned in the corresponding paragraph of the complaint and it was duly confirmed from the complainant but the complaint never raised any objections regarding the same. It is incorrect that said call and requested that he has not used ATM card in Dubai and never made transactions. It is incorrect that the complainant was present at Park Plaza, Ludhiana and made payment as alleged. It is incorrect that thereafter the complainant immediately blocked his credit card by making complaint to customer care of the opposite party. It is admitted that the opposite party has issued new ATM card bearing no. 5337440610019231 and the complainant started using it. It is incorrect that the opposite party no. 2 made call to the complaint to complainant will be settled. It is incorrect that the opposite party has assured that they will reversed  the payment soon to the account of the complainant. It is denied that the intention of the opposite parties have become dishonest in fact amount debited by the respondents is towards the  amount outstanding against the credit card and the respondents under the banker’s lien has a right to deduct the amount form the account maintained by the complainant towards any amount  due towards the respondents. It is also denied that due to the freezing the account of the complainant, the complainant suffered great hardship form the hands of the opposite parties as alleged. It is incorrect that amount of installment has been deducted from the above said account illegally. It is incorrect that due to the freezing of the above said account the complainant is unable to run his business and is suffering loss due which is unaccountable as alleged. Thus, alleging no deficiency in service on the part of the answering Ops and prayed for dismissal the present complaint.  
3. The learned counsel for the complainant has tendered certain documents in evidence along with affidavit and closed the evidence. The Ops also tendered documents in evidence and closed the evidence.
4. We heard the learned counsel for the complainant and OPs and have gone through the record file, carefully and minutely. 
5. In view of our above discussion, we feel, that the complainant has failed to prove his case and not entitled to any relief, therefore, the complaint stands dismissed. The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties, as per rules. The file be sent back to the District Consumer Commission, Ludhiana, for consigning the same to the Record Room.

Announced:

02.01.2023                                                                 (RANJIT SINGH)

                                                                                      PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                   (RANVIR KAUR)

                                                                                       MEMBER