BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 37 of 2019
Date of Institution : 25.01.2019
Date of Decision : 22.08.2019
Gori Shankar son of Sh. Daulat Ram, aged 50 years resident of HUDA Complex, Sirsa, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Surkhab Chowk, Sirsa.
2. Headquarter, HDFC, 1st Floor, C.S. No.6/242, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI R.L. AHUJA…………. PRESIDENT.
SHRI ISSAM SINGH SAGWAL….. MEMBER
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR……… MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
In brief, the case of complainant is that complainant got issued a credit card from HDFC Bank, Surkhab chowk, Sirsa, the number of which is 4893772905351058 and through the credit card he made purchasing in the month of September, 2018 for an amount of Rs.3357/- but the bank had given bill of Rs.11900/- which is wrong. That the complainant raised his grievance in this regard to the officials of the bank but they did not listen him and replied that he has to deposit whole amount whereas the complainant made purchasing of Rs.3357/- only so he cannot deposit such huge amount and he is also not having saving account in the aforesaid bank. It is further averred that complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.1000/- in the said account of credit card but due to non correction of the bill amount, penalty is being imposed every day and in this regard he is being harassed by the officials of the bank again and again on telephone. It is further averred that complainant is a Government employee and due to behaviour pressure of officials of the bank to deposit the unnecessary amount of bill, his work is being affected and threats are being given on telephone that if he does not deposit the bill, then they will take legal action against him and will get recover the amount alongwith litigation expenses. That due to act and conduct of the bank, the complainant has suffered mental harassment and financial loss. Hence, this complaint.
2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections that complainant has no cause of action for filing the present complaint against the ops, that complaint is not maintainable in the present form and that complainant has not come before this Forum with clean hands and filed the present complaint on false and incorrect facts. The true facts are that complainant has availed the facility of credit card from HDFC Bank Sirsa vide credit card No.4893772905351058 subject to the terms and conditions of the Card Member Agreement and assured to make payments regularly and punctually to the Bank. But the complainant had failed to adhere to the financial discipline for which he had agreed to at the time of issuance of the above said credit card to him. The complainant committed default in the payment of the amount utilized by him vide aforesaid credit card. It is further submitted that aforesaid credit card was availed by complainant in the month of August, 2018. The complainant made purchases as reflected in the statement of complainant in the statement dated 13.9.2018. The payment was to be made up to 3.10.2018. It is clear from the statement of record that complainant has availed a policy from HDFC Ergo General Insurance and paid premium of Rs.5762/-, made purchases from Richlook Sirsa for an amount of Rs.2650/-, made Flipkart payment of Rs.14,999/-, purchased Petrol from Jhunthra Petrol City for an amount of Rs.607.08. It is clear from the statement of account that payment was received vide IMPS for an amount of Rs.14,999/- and petro surcharge waiver was given and in this manner his bill for the period 28.8.2018 to 12.9.2018 was issued for an amount of Rs.9109/-. The bill was issued on 13.9.2018 and the payment of aforesaid bill was to be made on 3.10.2018. But the complainant did not make the payment within the stipulated period. It is further submitted that during the tenure of 14.9.2018 to 13.10.2018, the complainant spent Rs.100/- as reflected in the statement of account. As the complainant failed to pay the amount of his previous bill, hence a penalty of Rs.500/- alongwith IGST Rs.90/- was imposed upon him. Further due to fault, he also became liable to pay the finance charges as per the terms and conditions to the extent of Rs.318.87. In this manner the bill dated 13.10.20187 was issued for an amount of Rs.10,112/- which was to be paid by the complainant immediately. It is further submitted that in the bill itself it was stated that the minimum due amount which was required to be deposited by the complainant/ customer was Rs.970/- and in the absence of the aforesaid payment the services of the credit card will be discontinued. The complainant instead of clearing his whole liability only deposited the minimum due amount i.e. Rs.1000/- on 18.10.2018. He spent Rs.100/- through his credit card. Again as the complainant failed to clear his outstanding, hence penalty and finance charges were imposed accordingly from time to time. As per the statement of account/ bill of credit card dated 13.12.2018, the complainant was liable to pay an amount of Rs.10,471/-. The complainant committed default continuously, hence his credit card was blocked having no other alternative and as per the statement/ bill dated 13.3.2019, the complainant is liable to pay Rs.14,578/- to the ops. It is further submitted that as per card member agreement, customers are given interest free period ranging from 20 to 50 days subject to terms and conditions in the card member agreement. During this interest free period no interest is charged on the customers card account. HDFC Bank sends a monthly statement showing the payment credited and the transactions debited to the card member’s account to all the card members. The HDFC Bank offers the card member, the facility of revolving credit. The card member may choose to pay only the minimum amount due printed on the statements. The card member can also choose to pay the total amount due or any part of the amount above the minimum amount due. Such payments should be made before the payment due date. The complainant did not make the payment in accordance with the installments fixed between the parties as per repayment schedule agreed by him. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.
3. The parties then led their respective evidence.
4. We have heard complainant as well as learned counsel for opposite parties and have perused the case file carefully.
5. The complainant in order to prove his complaint has furnished his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and also furnished copy of credit card statement Ex.C1 and copy of his identity card Ex.C2. On the other hand, ops have furnished affidavit of Sh. Mohinder Sharma, Senior Manager Ex.R1 and CD Ex.R2.
6. Admittedly, the complainant had got issued a credit card bearing No.4893772905351058 from the ops and had been using the same. As per contention of complainant he made purchases of Rs.3357/- in the month of September, 2018, but however, bill of Rs.11900/- was issued by ops which is illegal and false. He is ready to deposit amount of Rs.3357/- out of which he has already deposited Rs.1000/- with the ops, but however, they are harassing the complainant on one way or the other.
7. On the other hand, there is specific allegations of ops that complainant has been holding a credit card and has been using the same and making purchases from time to time and in this way a sum of Rs.10,112/- was to be paid by him which he is not paying as per terms and conditions of the credit card.
8. During the course of arguments, complainant who has appeared in person has conceded that he made certain purchases by using this credit card, but however, bill submitted by ops qua purchases is quite excessive for which he is not liable to pay but he has conceded certain purchases except amount of insurance which has been debited in his account. Learned counsel for ops has strongly contended that there is a CD Ex.R2 regarding conversation which took place between officials of ops and complainant qua his purchases made through the credit card. The complainant has not denied the execution of agreement at the time of issuance of credit card and there is dispute of amount of purchases between the parties. So, it will be in the fitness of things, if the present complaint is partly allowed and direction is given to the ops to overhaul the account of complainant in his presence.
9. In view of the above, we partly allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to serve a seven days prior notice to the complainant and to overhaul the account in his presence and also to show and prove documents of purchases which he has made through the credit card and thereafter settling the legally payable amount provide 15 days time to make payment of remaining amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement. In case complainant does not pay the remaining legally payable amount as per terms and conditions of the agreement, the ops shall be at liberty to recover the same in accordance with law. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, no order as to costs. A copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in open Forum. Member Member President,
Dated:22.08.2019. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
