PER MR.B.S.WASEKAR, HON’BLE PRESIDENT

1)                The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  According to the complainant, his savings account is with the O.P.No.3. The O.P.No.3 issued credit card bearing No.5523441000352701 in favour of the complainant.  The complainant utilized this credit card and repaid the amount in due time.  In July-2009, the complainant was on office tour therefore, there was delay for two-three days in payment of credit card bill.  The O.P.No.2 issued bill showing late payment charges and interest.  The complainant requested the O.P.No.2 to withdraw late payment charges and interest. The representative of the O.P.No.2 assured to withdraw the late payment charges and interest. But, he failed to withdraw the charges. In April-2010, the O.P.No.2 withdraw late payment charges to some extent but he did not withdraw the interest amount.  The complainant paid all the amount and nothing is due.  As the opponents failed to withdraw all the charges, the complainant stopped the use of credit card.  The complainant made complaint with the Grievance Committee but the said Committee avoided to take action.  On 9^th May, 2012, the opponents issued notice to the complainant demanding Rs.45,452.88/-. The opponents freezed the amount of Rs.8,401.78/- from saving account of the complainant bearing No.00131000156329.  Due to withdrawal of amount from saving account, the complainant suffered mentally.  The opponent withdrew the amount of Rs.27,401/- from the saving account of the complainant therefore the complainant issued notice claiming return of amount.  As there was no compliance, the complainant has filed this complaint for return of amount of Rs.27,401/-.  He has also claimed compensation of Rs.l Lakh for mental harassment and cost of this proceeding. 

2)                The opponents appeared and filed their written statement.  The savings account and credit card of the complainant is admitted.  The complainant was not regular in payment of credit card bill amount.  The amount of Rs.31,110.19/- was outstanding as on 31^st January, 2013.  The interest was charged on this amount i.e. Rs.762.20/- on 28^th February, 2013, Rs.780.87/- on 31^st March, 2013 and Rs.800/- on 30^th April, 2013. Thus, total amount of Rs.33,453.27/- was outstanding against the complainant as on 30^th April, 2013.  The opponents partly waived late payment charges but did not waive interest.  It is the discretion of the bank to waive the amount as a goodwill gesture. It is not the right of the customer.  The complainant is still liable to pay the amount of Rs.33,453.27/-.  The complainant was always irregular in payment, therefore, as per the terms and conditions, the complainant is liable to pay the chargers.  The opponents are entitled to recover this amount.  Therefore, the complainant is not entitled for the relief as claimed.  Hence, the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

3)                After hearing all the parties and after going through the record, following points arise for our consideration.

POINTS

REASONS

4) As to Point No.1 & 2 :- It is not disputed that the complainant has savings account with the O.P./Bank.  It is also not disputed that the complainant was utilizing credit card facility.  According to the opponents, the complainant was irregular in payment of credit card bill.  There was delay in payment therefore, as per the terms and conditions, the opponents are entitled to recover late payment charges and interest.  The opponents have given the balance of credit card bill i.e. Rs.31,110.19/- as on 31^st January, 2013.  The opponents have claimed interest on the outstanding amount.  The complainant in the complaint itself has stated that in July-2009, he was on office tour therefore there was delay of two-three days in paying credit bill amount.  According to the complainant, he has not demanded credit card facility therefore there was no agreement.  The opponents have produced copy of application of the complainant dated 7^th February, 2007.  It shows that the complainant requested for credit card facility and the same was allowed. The opponents have produced copy of terms and conditions for the use of credit card facility.  In view of this terms and conditions, the opponents are entitled to recover late payment charges and interest on the outstanding credit card bill amount.  As the complainant was irregular in payment and as there was delay, the opponents have charged late payment charges and interest on the outstanding credit bill amount.  Admittedly, the complainant had utilized the credit card facility and there was delay in payment.  Therefore, he is liable to pay late payment charges as well as interest.  The opponents have waived part late payment charges by way of goodwill gesture.  The complainant can not claim it as of right.  There is lien of the opponent bank on the amount of complainant for the outstanding credit card bill amount.  The opponents have recovered it.  The complainant can not claim to return the said amount.  Therefore, the complainant is not entitled for the relief as prayed. 

5)                The learned advocate for the complainant has submitted that there is no power of attorney in favour of Shri Rahul Gangurde who has signed the written statement and filed affidavit of evidence on behalf of the opponents.  On perusal of record, the opponents have issued letter of authority in favour of Shri Rahul Gangurde who is working as Manger with the O.P./Bank.  Mr.Rahul Gangurde has submitted the written statement and filed affidavit of evidence on the basis of the record available with the O.P./Bank.  It is not his personal knowledge.  The learned advocate for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment reported in AIR 1928 Bombay 225 and 2006 (6) All MR 397.  In these judgments, there was no power of attorney or valid authority in favour of the complainant.  In the instant complaint before us, the opponents have issued letter of authority in favour of Mr.Rahul Gangurde who is working as Manger with the O.P./Bank.  Mr.Rahul Gangurde signed the written statement and filed affidavit of evidence on the basis of the documents available with the O.P./Bank.  There is authority in favour of Mr.Rahul Gangurde.  Therefore, the abovecited judgments are not relevant. 

6)                It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the complainant that the O.P./Bank has charged interest exorbitantly.  No such plea is taken in the complaint.   The complainant has not given the details of exorbitant interest.  The complainant has no where stated about the charging of exorbitant interest.  The learned advocate for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment reported in III (2008) CPJ 98 (NC).  As stated above, the complainant has no where stated about the charging of exorbitant interest.  He has also not given details of interest.  Therefore, the abovecited judgments are not relevant. 

7)                Thus, there is no merit in the complaint.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1. Complaint stands dismissed.
2. Parties are left to bear their own costs.
3. Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced on 29^th October, 2014