Date of Filing: 11.08.2010
Date of Order: 03.02.2011
2
BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20
Dated: 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011
PRESENT
Sri S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President
Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member
Sri BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member
COMPLAINT NO: 1879 OF 2010
Nirmala Mathew
W/o. C.T. Mathew
106/107, Bethel Garden, 5th Cross
Manjunatha Layout, Munnekolale
Marath Halli, Bangalore 560 037 Complainant
V/S
1. H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd.
G-01, Discoverer Building
I.T. Park, White Field Road
Bangalore 560 066
Rep. by its Branch Manager
2. H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd.
Cards Division, No. 8
Lattice Bridge Road, Thiruvanmiyur
Chennai 600 041
Rep. by Legal Manager
3. H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd.
Ceebros Building, 110, N.M. Road
Aminjikarai, Chennai 600 029
Rep. by its authorized signatory Opposite Parties
ORDER
By the President Sri S.S. Nagarale
This is a complaint filed by the complainant requesting that opposite parties be directed to de-freeze S.B. A/c and to refund an amount of Rs. 16,779/- with interest and declare that legal notice dated 04.06.2010 issued by the opposite party is illegal and to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for mental agony.
The facts of the case are that complainant has saving bank account with opposite party No. 1 Bank for the last 10 years. She has a credit card of the opposite party bank since 3 years. She is employee in private company. Her salary has been credited to her S.B. account with opposite party No. 1. After several rounds of discussion and reconciliation the credit card balance was settled at Rs. 43,700/- as on 11.09.2009. In this regard opposite party No. 3 had issued letter the sum of Rs. 43,100/- has to be paid in six installments. The complainant had paid an amount of Rs. 28,550/- by way of six installments. Due to the relevant period she had to undergo Carpet Tunnel Operation. She had to incur expenditure of Rs. 37,000/- for the same. For this reason she could not keep up her payment schedule as fixed by the opposite party bank. As on 08.03.2010 balance amount of Rs. 14,050/- plus interest was there. Complainant checked the S.B. A/c. She noticed that her account was freezed and noticed that her EMI of Rs. 11,905/- payable to Axis Bank on 07.06.2010 on her car loan through S.B. A/c was also dishonoured. The S.B. A/c was unlawfully frozen by opposite party. Though the balance amount payable by the complainant towards her credit card account is Rs. 14,550/- the opposite parties have confiscated the entire amount of Rs. 31,329/-. In this way opposite parties have unlawfully confiscated an excess amount of Rs.16,779/-. Opposite party issued legal notice demanding Rs. 68,255/- which is devoid of merits. Hence, the complaint.
2. Opposite party has filed version stating that as per the settlement letter dated 11.09.2009, the settlement amount is Rs. 43,100/- has to be paid by the complainant in six installments. Complainant did not make payments as agreed. She is making payments to her whims and fancies. Complainant did not bother to pay the loan. Opposite party placed a ‘hold on funds’ by exercising lien and right of setoff. Notice dated 04.06.2010 was received by the complainant on 09.06.2010. Despite receipt of notice the complainant neither replied nor made the payment as demanded. There is no deficiency of service as alleged by the complainant. Complaint is not maintainable. For all these reasons stated above the opposite parties prayed to dismiss the complaint.
3. Both the parties have filed affidavit evidence. Complainant has produced some documents.
4. Arguments are heard.
5. The points for consideration are:
1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for de-freeze of the S.B. A/c?
3. Whether the complainant is entitled for the refund of Rs. 16,779/-?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation?
6. It is admitted case of the parties that complainant is having S.B. A/c with opposite party bank for last 10 years. It is also admitted case of the parties that complainant had credit card of opposite party bank since 3 years. The settlement letter was given to complainant in respect of credit card account dated 11.09.2009 by the opposite party bank. As per this letter Annexure A total amount payable was Rs. 43,100/- and same has to be paid in Six installments. It is the case of the complainant that she has paid in all Rs. 28,550/- out of the settlement amount of Rs. 43,100/-. The complainant submitted that during the relevant period she had to undergo “Carpet Tunnel Operation” for both hands for which she had to incur huge expenditure. Due to said reason she could not keep up her payment schedule as per the settlement letter dated 11.09.2009. Meanwhile, the opposite party bank by exercising banker’s lien and right of setoff option took the amount available in the S.B. account of the complainant. Hold of funds in the S.B. A/c was Rs. 31,329/- this was placed on 04.06.2010. The S.B. A/c of the complainant was freezed. Meanwhile, the complainant received notice from the opposite party bank dated 04.06.2010. It was shown that credit card balance as on date was Rs. 68,255/-, extent of ‘Hold on Funds’ is Rs. 31,329/- and hold on funds placed on 04.06.2010. This letter was posted to the complainant on 07.06.2010 and same has been received by the complainant on 09.06.2010. Therefore, it is clear by the document that before receipt of notice by the complainant, S.B. A/c was freezed. The entire balance available in the S.B. A/c was debited towards credit card account. The opposite party bank has committed deficiency in service in not giving notice to complainant before freezing the account. As per the settlement of credit card account amicably between parties the amount payable by the complainant was Rs. 43,100/- in six installments. The fact that complainant has paid Rs. 28,550/- is admitted and there is no dispute. The balance amount payable was only Rs. 14,550/-. The complainant given her explanation and reasons for not paying the entire settlement amount. Since she was not well and undergone operation and complainant incurred huge expenditure, she could not keep up the payment schedule. There was balance of Rs. 31,329/- in the S.B. A/c. The opposite party bank could have taken Rs. 14,550/- from the S.B. A/c towards the payment of credit card account. Instead of that the opposite party bank had taken Rs. 31,329/- from the S.B. account of complainant. This is clearly in excess of the outstanding balance of credit card account. Therefore, complainant prays refund of Rs. 16,779/- which has been illegally taken from the S.B. A/c. The complainant submitted that as per the settlement letter Rs. 43,100/- was payable out of that complainant has paid Rs. 28,550/-, the balance payable towards credit card account is Rs.14,550/-. But, the bank had issued notice on 04.06.2010 showing the credit card balance amount at Rs. 68,254/-. This is highly objectionable, unreasonable and illegal. The opposite party bank has not given any further details of settlement of account as to how they have arrived credit card balance at Rs. 68,254/-. The balance payable was only Rs. 14,550/-. Even if some interest has to be paid for delayed payment it may not be more than Rs. 16,000/-. The opposite party bank had taken Rs. 31,329/- which was available in the S.B. account. In this way the opposite party bank has taken more amount from the S.B. account of the complainant. The complainant has suffered injustice by the act of the opposite party. Therefore, complainant is definitely entitled for the refund of the excess amount taken from the S.B. A/c. Notice dated 04.06.2010 demanding credit card balance at Rs. 68,254/- has no legal basis. It cannot be enforced in law. There was amicable settlement between the parties in respect of credit card account and the amount payable was Rs. 43,100/-. Therefore, notice of the bank dated 04.06.2010 showing credit card balance at Rs. 68,254/- is illegal and without any basis. The learned advocate for the complainant submitted that opposite party bank be directed to defreeze the S.B. A/c and to direct the bank to refund the excess amount taken from the S.B. A/c. There is considerable force and merit in the submissions made by the learned advocate for the complainant. Taking into consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case it is just, fair and reasonable to direct the opposite party bank to revert Rs. 14,000/- to the S.B. A/c of the complainant. We have arrived to this figure so that the bank is entitled for interest amount of Rs. 2,779/- for delay in paying the credit card balance amount. Therefore, the opposite party bank shall have to be directed to revert / pay Rs. 14,000/- to the complainant immediately. The opposite party shall have to be directed to defreeze the S.B. account of the complainant because de-freezing of the S.B. A/c was illegal and without notice to the complainant. As regards the prayer of the complainant for payment of compensation for mental agony and deficiency of service etc., this request of the complainant is not considered since there is no evidence or material before the forum to grant compensation. There is nothing on record to show as to how the complainant suffered mental agony. She has not produced tenable evidence to show that she is entitled for the compensation for mental agony etc. In the result I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
7. The complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties are directed to defreeze S.B. A/c bearing No.4346772004130042 to the complainant immediately.
8. The opposite parties further directed to revert / pay Rs.14,000/- to the complainant immediately.
9. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately.
10. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011.
Order accordingly,
PRESIDENT
We concur the above findings.
MEMBER MEMBER
