Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/341/2006

Sanjeev Kumar, - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank Ltt., - Opp.Party(s)

Party in Person

22 Dec 2016

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   12.06.2006

                                                                        Date of Order :   22.12.2016

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

 

PRESENT: THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M.                       : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO. 341/2006

THUSDAY THIS  22^nd  DAY OF DECEMBER 2016

Sanjeev Kumar,

Director – Projects,  

M/s. Virmati Software and

Telecommunications Ltd.,

C-6, Pioneer Homes,

No.53, North Boag Road,

T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017.                           .. Complainant.

 

                                ..Vs..

The Manager (Credit Cards),

HDFC Bank Limited,

“ITC Centre”,

No.760, Anna Salai,

Chennai 600 002.                                                 .. Opposite party.

 

Counsel for the Complainant             :  M/s. Rahman,

Counsel for the opposite party          :  M/s. Deepa Hari Govind

 

ORDER

THIRU. S. PANDIAN, PRESIDENT

 

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant.

1. The averment of the complaint are brief as follows:

         The complainant hold a Master Credit Card, having number 5176 3510 0071 0099 from the opposite party since the month of  August 2004.    The complainant never approached the opposite party voluntarily for any such credit card, but infact he was coerced to obtain the credit card by one of the agents of the opposite party.   For the past two years when he had transactions through his credit card accounts and all the repayments made in time. 

2.     One of the agents  of the opposite party approached him in the month of January 2006, during him to buy a second Gold Master Card with lucrative offers.  The complainant opted to buy the second credit card only with the accounts of the existing credit card is closed.  But despite the protests of the complainant the agent of the opposite party persuaded him to buy the second Gold Master card bearing number 5176 5210 0146 4157 on 6.2.2006, with a credit limit of Rs.86,000/-.  

3.     That, in the second week of March 2006, when he used the second credit card for effecting payments of the reliance bills he was shocked and surprised to find that the credit card was rejected without assigning any reasons whatsoever.    At the time of rejection of the credit card he had only utilized a credit limit of Rs.9,000/- and Rs.75,000/- was available in his account.  Due to that incident he has not only suffered humiliation but also had to suffer loss of reputation and mental agony.   The complainant has caused legal notice to the opposite party through his counsel on 21.3.2006 by registered post.    But the opposite party is least bothered to send any reply for the said notice.   Hence the complaint.

4. Written Version of  opposite party is in briefly as follows:

        The opposite party denies all allegations except such facts that are specifically admitted herein.   It is true that the complainant was originally holding a Master Credit card issued by the bank.    The bank never lures anyone to take their credit card as the customers who apply alone are eligible for the credit card and as stated earlier, if the complainant was not really interested in possessing the second credit card, he could have denied the same and rejected the offer and having accepted the same.  It is not fair on part of the complainant to state that he was coerced or lured with offers from the bank. 

5.      The allegations made that only if his existing card account was closed, he would accept the second card is fermented imagination as both the cards are of different nature, the earlier one being International Silver Credit Card and the second one being Gold Master Card with different features and  facilities attached to it.   The opposite party that on 18.4.2006, the bank had very clearly intimated to the complainant to revert with his intention to upgrade his credit card or to decide the other way, for them in order to activate the card with higher credit limit.  However the complainant chose to remain silent on the letter resulting in the bank exercising caution and closing the second credit card in order to avoid any loss to the complainant and this is only a service gesture to prevent misuse of the card as no consent was given as per the letter dated 18.4.2006.  The entire cause of action is misconceived and based on assumptions and presumptions and thus as such the complainant is not entitled for any damages as claimed by him in the complaint.  

6.   The claim for compensation is not justified and illegal.   It is settled principle that there should be evidence on record to establish any loss or injury alleged to have been suffered by the complainant.   In the absence of such proof the claim cannot be sustained and has to be rejected totally.  Hence the complaint.

7.       In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit along with his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite party filed and Ex.B1 was marked on the side of the  opposite party.  

8.   At this juncture, the point for the consideration before this

        Forum is:  

 

 

1.  Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the 

     Opposite party as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.  Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief as prayed for?

9. Point No.1

        The case of the complainant is that without assigning any valid reasons  the opposite party closed the second Gold Master card bearing No.5176 5210 0146 4157 issued on 6.2.2006 with credit limit of Rs.86,000/-, and such sudden rejection of the said card has caused mental agony and loss of reputation.  While so, the opposite party denied the allegation of the complainant by stating that even assuming that the said credit card has been closed, there is no loss of injury caused to the complainant as alleged and there is no cause of action.   Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. 

10.    At this juncture, it goes without saying that it is the duty of the complainant to prove the allegation made against the opposite party and in what way the complainant was suffered, by means of consistent and acceptable evidence.   First of all, on careful perusal of the evidence of the complainant, it is seen that at the time of rejection of the credit card by the opposite party, the complainant had only credit limit of Rs.9,000/- and Rs.75,000/- was available in his account, and therefore the cancellation of his credit card without any intimation and  assigning any reasons to the complainant, had caused mental agony besides  the loss of reputation.    The copy of the credit card is marked as Ex.A3 and the legal notice sent to the opposite party is marked as Ex.A1 and the postal receipt is marked as Ex.A2.

10.    In such circumstances, it is clearly seen that without the legal notice, no other relevant documents produced by the complainant to show that the way in which the complainant had suffered loss or injury as alleged which is vital to prove the deficiency of service, since it is settled principle that there should be evidenced on record to establish any loss of injury alleged to have been caused by the act of the opposite party,    otherwise such facts loss its merits. 

11.    At the outset, on careful perusal of Ex.A1 legal notice, it is mentioned that the 2^nd week of March 2006 when the complainant used the second card for effecting payments of the Reliance bills, he was shocked and surprised to find that the card was rejected without assigning any reasons whatsoever.   If it is so, in order to substantiate the same, the complainant ought to have filed the Reliance bills as stated above, before this forum.  But the complainant failed to do so, which clearly creates grate doubts in this regard.  Therefore as rightly pointed out by the opposite party that the complainant has not proved the allegation properly against the opposite party.   

12.    Furthermore, it is seen from Ex.B1, on receipt of Ex.A1 legal notice the opposite party sent a reply had clearly stating that to upgrade existing silver credit card to gold credit card with enhanced credit limit of Rs.86,000/- on the card account and also sincerely regret inconvenience caused to the complainant.  The said averments made in Ex.B1 was clearly established.   That immediately on receipt of Ex.A1, the opposite party has complied the defects and to upgrade the existing  silver credit card to gold credit card with enhanced credit limit of Rs.86,000/- which was given in the rejection card.    In such circumstances as discussed earlier there is no concrete evidence to show that in what way the complainant has suffered injury or agony has not been proved.

13.    In the light of the above facts and circumstances and observations made above it is crystal clear that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.   Thus the Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

14. Point No.2:-            

As per the view concluded in point No.1, the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in the complaint.  Thus the point No.2 is answered accordingly.

         In the result, this complaint is dismissed.  No costs.

          Dictated by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  22^nd   day  of  December 2016.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 21.3.2006   - Copy of Legal notice.

Ex.A2- 21.3.2006  - Copy of Postal Receipt.

Ex.A3- 6.2.2006    - Copy of Credit card.

Opposite party’s side document: -

Ex.B1- 18.4.2006  - Copy of letter from opposite party to complainant.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.