DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area

(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016

Case No.526/09

ORDER

Sh. Sanjay Kr. Singh

A-409 Durga Vihar

Deoli Extension, New Delhi-110062.                    …Complainant

VERSUS

HDFC Bank

Credit Card Division, Business Loan Division

E-413, Saket

New Delhi-110017.

Sahara Airlines

28, Gopaldas Bhavan, Barakhamba Road

Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001.                  ….Opposite Parties

Date of Institution :02.07.2009

Date of order         :25.06.2022    

ORDER

President: Monika Srivastava

The complainant has filed the present complaint seeking refund of Rs.18,187/- which is claimed to be wrongly deducted from the complainant’s account.  The complainant is also seeking compensation for harassment suffered by the complainant as also litigation cost.

It is stated by the complainant that he is a credit card holder of HDFC Bank, Saket and also has an account in the said bank No.00431000062336.  It is stated that in the month of August 2008 he received a letter from HDFC Bank, OP 1 after which he reported three disputed transactions of Rs.10,950/- each to the Credit Card Division of the OP-1 Bank.  A complaint was lodged by him vide No.63293 dated 06.08.2008 with Sahara Airlines i.e OP-2 as the disputed transactions involved the said Airlines.  Since OP-1 showed their inability to provide any help, the complainant got in touch with Sahara Airlines.

It is stated by the complainant that even after several reminders given to Credit Card Division of, OP 1 and to OP 2 nothing was done, in fact, OP-1 sent threatening calls and letters demanding payment against the disputed transactions.  It is further stated by the complainant that in the month of February, 2009, the savings account of the complainant with the HDFC Bank, Saket No. 00431000062336 was put on hold and the entire cash balance of Rs.18,187/- was debited by the bank against the disputed Credit Card transactions.  The complainant claims that this act of the OP-1 resulted in bouncing of loan EMI of Loan Account No.13907462.  It is alleged by the complainant that he made the payment in the month of April, 2009 on the assurance of the Business Loan Department of OP-1 that they would be providing a speedy solution to the problem however, nothing was done and therefore the complainant filed the present complaint.

OP-1 i.e. HDFC Bank has filed its reply wherein they have taken preliminary objections that the present complaint is devoid of any merit as there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP.  It is also stated that the complainant has filed the present complaint abusing the process of law, as he has deliberately not paid the dues raised by OP-1 legally for use of Credit Card availed by the complainant.

On merits, the OP has stated that the complainant was the credit card holder of VISA Silver-Personal bearing no. 4346771000384892 which was later upgraded to Master Card Gold bearing no. 5176528000215373 on 19.3.2006 however, this credit card was lost and was blocked on 06.08.2008.  A new card No.5176528000261237 was issued to the complainant on 31.08.2009.

It is stated by OP-1 that averments made by the complainant are false, baseless, misconstrued and the complainant alone is  responsible for the credit card transactions carried out by him in August 2008.  It is stated that vide letter dated 22.08.2008 which is annexed as Annexure OP-1/4 the transaction was processed on the basis of instructions received from the merchant and sent to the complainant.  It is the complainant himself who is responsible for maintaining the secrecy of his PIN and for the safe custody of his credit card.  It is stated that the complainant did not submit any consumer dispute form to OP-1 which is necessary to initiate risk investigation. 

It is further stated that the total outstanding of Rs.180253.75/- is due against complainant on account of the above stated credit card and since the complainant did not respond to the repeated reminders, OP-1 credited bankers lien of Rs.18537.19 on the complainant’s bank account No. 00431000062336 on  12.02.2009 in accordance with the Card Member Agreement (CMA). Notice dated 12.02.2009 is annexed as Annexure OP-1/7.  Further, it is stated that the complainant had taken cash on call loan of Rs.38,000/-for a tenure of 12 months at an interest rate of 2.25 % per month which was sanctioned and credited to his account No. 00431000062336 on 29.3.2008.  It is stated that the complainant is not entitled to any compensation, or damages as he is seeking to enrich himself by unlawful means by not paying expenses incurred by him on his credit card.

OP-2 i.e. Jet Airways which was earlier Sahara Airlines has stated that OP-2 has been unnecessarily dragged into the controversy as the complainant has himself admitted vide annexure-A filed alongwith the complaint that airlines did not receive the payment due to unmatched CVV No. hence tickets were not booked.  Therefore it is stated OP-2 cannot be held liable for the booking of tickets for which the payment was never received.  It is also stated that the complaint is liable to be dismissed as there has been no money transaction between the complainant and OP-2 and therefore neither deficiency in services nor unfair trade practice can be alleged against OP-2 and therefore, the complainant is not even a consumer qua OP-2.  It is stated by OP-2 that OP-2 is not in any way liable for the disputed transactions on the credit card of complainant.  It is further stated that the complainant was informed that this money was never received in the account of OP-2 and therefore they have been unnecessarily dragged/impleaded in the present complaint. It is further stated by the OP 2 that the complaint ought to be dismissed and the complainant be made liable to pay for the transactions with OP 2.

Evidence by way of affidavits and written arguments of the complainant and OP 1 and 2 are on record. Oral arguments were also heard. It is observed from the record that OP 1 was proceeded exparte on 29.04.2014 but the order was set aside by the Hon’ble State Commission on payment of Rs.5,000/-.

There is no doubt from the evidence on record that the complainant was the credit card holder bearing No.5176528000215373 on 20.07.2008 when the disputed transactions took place. The said credit card is said to be lost thereafter i.e on 06.08.2008, therefore the repercussion of stolen card do not come into play in this case. It is also seen from the evidence on record that the complainant has filed an undated complaint with OP 1 complaining about the said transactions and the same is also not supported by any postal receipt. It is also evident from the statement of the credit card filed by OP 1 that the complainant was defaulting in paying his credit card payments.  Since the complainant was in control of the credit card at the time of the disputed transactions, he is liable to pay the same. Also, as per the terms and conditions of the agreement of the credit card, OP 1 has “a lien on all monies belonging to the Card member standing to their credit in any account/custody of the bank…..”, therefore, we do not find any fault on the part of OP 1 to act in the manner that they did.

The complainant has also not been to gather any proof from OP 2 that the said payments were not made to them. The complaint being devoid of any merits, is dismissed.        

File be consigned to the record room after giving copy of the order to the parties as per rules.