BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No.246 of 2015
Date of Institution: 22.4.2015
Date of Decision: 11.5.2016
Gurjit Singh Bajwa son of Sh. Sulakhan Singh aged about 44 years, resident of 119-A, Ward No. 5, Sant Avenue, G.T. Road, Amritsar
Complainant
Versus
- HDFC Bank, Hall Bazar, Amritsar through its Branch Manager/Person Over All Incharge
- HDFC Credit Card Division, SCO 506/507, Second Floor, above Sony Centre, Sector 70, Mohali, through its Manager/Principal Officer/Person Over Al Incharge
- HDFC Credit Card Division, Phase-I, 28 Industrial Area, Chandigarh, through its Manager/Principal Officer/Person Over All Incharge
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 11 & 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Present: For the Complainant : Sh.Deepak Bhandari,Adv.
For the Opposite Parties : Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Advocate
Coram
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Gurjit Singh Bajwa , complainant has brought the instant complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that the complainant is a peace loving and law abiding citizen and is permanent resident of Amritsar. One saving bank account was got opened by the complainant with opposite party No.1 vide account No. 263100010971. Later on the complainant got closed the abovesaid saving bank by making request to opposite party No.1 on 6.11.2004. Earlier opposite party No.1 got issued credit card through opposite parties No.2 & 3 in the name of the complainant bearing credit card No. 0005176351001174246. However, complainant never asked the opposite parties to issue any credit card . But the opposite parties issued the credit card in the name of the complainant of their own. The complainant was not at all in the need of abovesaid credit card and as such he also requested the opposite parties for cancellation of said credit card vide his letter dated 17.2.2005 . Accordingly credit card was also got cancelled. Thereafter complainant neither opened any other account in the abovesaid bank nor applied for any credit card. The complainant also did not receive any credit card from the opposite parties. But, however, in the year 2010 complainant received a telephonic call from the office of the opposite parties and the person who called the complainant told that the complainant has been using one credit card bearing No. 4346711008739840 and he alleged that a huge amount is due payable by the complainant. The complainant received great shock to know about the said false fact and he immediately approached the opposite party No.1 and requested opposite party No.1 that he has already closed his bank account and he has also withdrawn/cancelled his credit card about 5 years ago. As such question of receiving or using any credit card by the complainant does not arise at all. Besides oral requests the complainant has also written letters dated 5.4.2010 and 15.4.2010 to the opposite parties and requested them not to raise any false claim against the complainant. Upon this officials of the opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that it seems that there is some fault on the part of the bank authorities and they will resolve the matter of their own and no further claim will be raised from the complainant in any manner. Thereafter the period of about 5 years has further been elapsed . Neither the complainant ever approached the said bank i.e. opposite party No.1 nor opposite parties No.2 & 3 for issuance of any credit card and even during that period of about five years the opposite. Opposite parties have also not raised any demand/claim from the complainant. But now recently when the complainant approached other bank for obtaining loan facility. On enquiry this fact came to the notice of the complainant that the name of the complainant has been added in the list of defaulters of the banks. After coming to know about this fact complainant made requisite enquiries and came to know that the opposite parties have made the complainant as defaulter intentionally and willfully on the basis of use of credit card in the year 2008. However, the fact remains that since the year 2005, the bank account of the complainant has already been closed and the credit card has also been got cancelled by the complainant in the year 2005 and as such question of misuse of any credit card by the complainant in the year 2008 does not arise at all. It is also pointed out here that in the year 2006 the complainant has shifted his residence from his previous address to the present address and new address of the complainant was not available in the bank record. As such question of issuance of any credit card to the complainant in the year 2008 does not arise at all. There is absolutely no liability of any kind whatsoever against the complainant . But the opposite parties have wrongly added the name of the complainant in the list of bank defaulters. As such it is requested that opposite parties may be directed not to raise any illegal demand of Rs. 12000/- approximately from the complainant and also to remove the name of the complainant from the list of bank defaulters. Opposite parties may also be directed to pay Rs. 20000/- as compensation to the complainant for mental tension, pain, agony , harassment and inconvenience etc. Hence, this complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing joint written statement taking certain preliminary objections therein inter-alia that complaint filed by the complainant against the opposite parties is not legally maintainable ; that the present complaint is an abuse of the process of law and court, therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed ; that complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint ; that no cause of action has arisen in favour of the complainant to file the present complaint ; that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and he is guilty of suppression of material facts from the court. As such relief claimed for is not available to the complainant. On merits, it is denied that complainant has ever applied for issuance of credit card. It is also denied that complainant never asked the opposite parties to issue credit card, as alleged. It is also denied that said credit card was got cancelled, as alleged. It is denied that complainant has closed his account, as alleged. It is also denied that any request was made by the complainant to the opposite parties in that regard. Remaining facts narrated in the complaint are also denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost was made
3. In his bid to prove Sh.Deepak Bhandari,Adv.counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.CW1/A, courier slip dated 19.4.2010 Ex.C-1, copy of letter dated 15.4.2010 Ex.C-2, letter dated 5.4.2010 Ex.C-3, account closure statement Ex.C-4, letter Ex.C-5, courier slip dated 7.2.2005 Ex.C-6, letter dated 17.2.2005 Ex.C-7.
4. To rebut the aforesaid evidence Sh.Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Adv.counsel for the opposite parties tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Bhupinder Kumar,Assistant Manager Legal Ex.OP1, copy of credit card application Ex.OP2, sliver credit card application Ex.OP3, copy of bank details Ex.OP4, cop of declaration Ex.OP5, copy of verification report Ex.OP6, copy of tele verification report Ex.OP7, copy of residence verification report Ex.OP8, copy of detail of account Ex.OP9, account opening form Ex.OP10, copy of snaps on account opening form Ex.OP11, copy of ration card Ex.OP12, copy of payment made to bank through cheque Ex.OP13, copies of duplicate credit card statements Ex.OP14 to OP22, copy of credit card application Ex.OP23, copy of sliver credit card application Ex.OP24, copy of bank detail Ex.OP25, copy of declaration Ex.OP26, copy of bank calling cheque list Ex.OP27, copy of residence verification report Ex.OP28, copy of business verification report Ex.OP29, copy of CD Rom verification report Ex.OP30, detail of account No. 26310000059301 Ex.OP31, copy of saving account Ex.OP32, snap verification on saving account Ex.OP33, nomination form DA 1 Ex.OP34, copies of driving licence Ex.OP35 and OP36, copy of form No. 60 Ex.OP37, copy of second card Ex.OP38 to Ex.OP42, copy of reward point summary Ex.OP43, copy of account intimation regarding overdue Ex.OP44 to OP49, copy of terms and conditions Ex.OP50, copy of schedule of charges Ex.OP51 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite parties.
5. We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
6. On the basis of the evidence on record, ld. Counsel for the complainant has vehemently contended that it is not disputed that complainant opened his saving bank account with the opposite party No.1 vide account No. 263100010971. It is further proved on record that said saving bank account was closed by the complainant on 6.11.2004, copy of the closure form accounts for Ex.C-4. It is also come on record that opposite party No.1 got issued the credit card in favour of the complainant from opposite parties No.2 & 3 bearing No. 0005176351001174246 . However, complainant did not make any request in that regard. On the request of the complainant, opposite parties cancelled credit card on the written request of the complainant dated 17.2.2005, copy whereof is Ex.C-7. Opposite parties cancelled the credit card granted in favour of the complainant. However, in the year 2010, complainant received telephonic call from the office of the opposite party that he was using one credit card bearing No.4346711008739840. It was also alleged that huge amount is due and payable by the complainant. The complainant took up the matter with opposite party No.1 vide letters dated 5.4.2010 and 15.4.2010, copies whereof are Ex.C-2 and Ex.C-3 respectively. The officials of opposite party No.1 assured the complainant that it seems that it seems that there was some fault on the part of the bank authorities and they will resolve the matter of their own. It is further case of the complainant that after the period of about 5 years , complainant was never approached by opposite party No.1 nor by opposite parties No.2 & 3 for issuance of any credit card nor any demand/claim was ever raised by them against the complainant. The complainant also shifted his residence in the year 2006 to the present address . So the bank authorities were also not in possession of his new address. As such question of issuance of any card to the complainant in the year 2008 does not arise at all. It is case of the complainant that no liability of any kind whatsoever was due or payable by the complainant . Now opposite parties have raised a demand of Rs. 12000/- approximately from the complainant which is quite illegal , arbitrary. Besides that the complainant has also been declared as defaulter by the opposite parties in the list of bank defaulters (SIBBAL). Ld.counsel for the complainant has vehemently contended that the name of the complainant from the list of the defaulters is required to be removed and further more the illegal demand raised by the opposite parties No.1 to 3 is also liable to be quashed and the complainant is entitled for grant of compensation as prayed for vide instant complaint and the complaint may be allowed accordingly.
7. However, from the facts and evidence on record, it becomes evident that the complainant has filed a false and frivolous complaint . It is the case of the complainant that in the year 2004 , he had opened a bank account with opposite party No.1. Opposite parties No.2 & 3 at the instance of opposite party No.1 also got issued a credit card in his favour bearing credit card No. 0005176351001174246. However, the credit card was got cancelled vide letter dated 17.2.2005 Ex.C-7. After 17/2/2005, the complainant has ceased to be a consumer of opposite parties 1,2 & 3. As such the complaint under section 11,12 & 13 of the Consumer Protection Act on behalf of the complainant is not maintainable before this Forum. It is in evidence that the complainant owe a sum of Rs. 12000/- to opposite party No.1. Even if it is presumed that there was some fault in the account keeping of the bank, even then, the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable. Reliance can be placed upon Bihar State Housing Board Vs. Chairman-Cum-Managing Director & Others 1(1996) CPJ 228 (NC) wherein it has been laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission that if dispute between the parties related to the settlement of the accounts and for balance due on the basis of the accounts, the same does not fall within the ambit of section 2(1)(c )(e) of the Act.
8. An account related dispute is not a consumer dispute. We draw support from the case Ashok Leyland Finance Limited Vs. Himanshu S. Thumar 2005(II) CPJ page 92 ,wherein the Hon'ble Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission , Ahmedabad has held in an appeal titled that account dispute is not a consumer dispute and the complaint should not have been entertained by the District Consumer Forum.
9. As a matter of fact that complainant has not closed his account and he has not got his credit card cancelled. The complainant rather shifted his residence and the opposite parties have not committed any illegality, wrong or arbitrary act against the principle of natural justice. The demand has rightly been made by the opposite parties. The complainant has not suffered any mental pain, agony, harassment and inconvenience and monetary loss and the complainant is not entitled to any relief as claimed vide instant complaint. As such complaint fails and the same is ordered to be dismissed accordingly. However, this order should not pose any hindrance to the complainant in approaching appropriate Forum/Court for redressal of his grievance, if any related to this complaint. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 11.05.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Member
