Date of Filing:23-08-2016  

                                                                                         Date of Order:19 -2-2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD

P r e s e n t­

HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B.  PRESIDENT.

HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER

Tuesday, the 19^th day of February, 2019

C.C.No.402 /2016

Between

Smt. Muppaneni Triveni

W/o.Bala Baskar

Aged about 36 years, Occ: Employee,

R/o.Plot No.415, Happy Homes Apts.,

Besides Sameti, Water Tank Road,

Old Malakpet, Hyderabad – 500036                                          ……Complainant

And

1. H.D.F.C  Credit Card Division,

Rep. by its authorized signatory

O/o.1-10- 60/3, Begumpet,

Suryodaya Building, 5^th floor,

Opp: Shoppers Stop- 500 016

2. Deals Bazaare,

Rep.  by its authorized signatory,

5a/14, 2^nd floor, near Malik Jewellers,

Tilak Nagar, Delhi, New Delhi  Dist

India – 110018                                                                 ….Opposite Parties

Counsel for the complainant                      :  Party in person

Counsel for the opposite Party No.1         :  Lotus  Law Associates  

                                        opposite Party No. 2   :     -   

O R D E R

(By Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)

            This complaint is preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act of 1986 alleging  unfair trade  practice  and deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and a direction to refund an amount of Rs.12,500/- with interest at 18%P.A from 24-02-2015 to the date of payment  and another  direction to opposite party No.1 not to threaten the complainant  to put her  credit card  and information  is in block list  and compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and the cost of this complaint at Rs.10,000/-

1. The complainant’s case  in brief is that  she is account  holder of the opposite party  bank with  a credit card.  On 24-02-2015 she received a phone call  from  a person of head  office of opposite party   at Mumbai  informing her that  her  credit card will be  upgraded to Titanium  card and she was having  points of 12,000 and odd and  out of it  8000 points  will be expired  and to avoid  expiry asked to do  some transaction.  By then the complainant was in 3^rd month  of pregnancy and  to avoid stress of   phone calls  she agreed  their proposal and made  purchase of  product  from opposite party   No.2  worth  of Rs.6,500/- for up-gradation  of credit card and on the promise  that the amount will be  reemitted back into her account in 9 months time.  She would not have  purchased  any product but for upgradation  of credit card and on the assurance that amount will be remitted back  into her account within one month.  Subsequent to purchase of the product even after  lapse of months time, the amount of Rs.6,500/- was not remitted into her account hence she raised dispute for the transaction  and made  mail  conversation  with opposite party No.1&2.  She also   tried  to cancel the  order placed for purchase  of the product but there was no contact number and no response from opposite party  No.1&2.  She also asked to opposite party No.1 to  investigate the issue but no response  for it.  She received a mail from opposite party  No.2 informing her that  they are processing for refund of the amount of Rs.6,500/- in 10  business  working days  but it has  not happened till date.  Complainant finally asked  the opposite party   No.1&2  through mail  that   she want to cancel  the transaction  and requested to raise  a credit memo  and pack is in good condition  for return,  thereafter recently  opposite party No.1 started making  calls asking her pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- which was due interest on  the purchase amount of Rs.6,500/-.

                 Opposite party No.1&2 colluded together and played fraud  on the complainant  asking her to  purchase   product worth of Rs.6,500/- and  not responded  to her mails  properly.  Thus she was cheated by opposite party  No. 1&2 and it caused mental agony and harassment  while she was pregnancy stage  and subsequent to deliver.                   Opposite party No.1 threatening  the complainant to put   her  credit card  information in  block list   and thereby caused  her  financial  loss.  Hence the present complaint  for the aforesaid reliefs.   

2.       The opposite   party No.1 alone filed written version , opposite   party No.2 did not appear even after service  of complainant notice. 

3.        The stand  of opposite   party No.1  in  written version  is that  no one  from its head office  called  upon  to complainant  to purchase of product from opposite   party No.2  with an assurance    to  refund the amount  to  her account after purchase  in nine months time.  The opposite   party No.1 is  bank and   there was necessity  to recommend  purchase a product  from opposite   party No.2.  How the amount  will be reverted to the complainant’s account when she made purchase of the product.  It is fact that the complainant  made purchase of the product from opposite   party No.2 and said product  has not  been returned by the complainant to opposite   party No.2, then how can the amount will be reverted back  to her account.  Since the complainant  has  not paid the amount   for the purchase of the  product  it attracted late payment charges and interest   which are liable  to be paid  by her.  There was no necessity  for opposite   party No.1 colluded with opposite   party No.2.  Complainant was not threatened  to keep her credit   information in  block list.  Even according to mail  copies filed by  the complainant  she was asked to pay the  principle  amount, to  avoid penalties and interest.  When the complainant purchased a product  from opposite   party No.2  and obtained delivery  how can  opposite   party No.1  is liable to revert back the amount into her account is not stated.  The complainant was asked to provide  the cancelation confirmation  that she  has not returned the product to opposite   party No.2 from  whom she purchased. An information of mail was sent to the complainant on 8-8-2016 that it received information  from the merchant that the  goods were delivered to  her.   Since complainant did not return the product to opposite   party No.2, opposite   party No.1 could not settle the issue as such  the complainant liable to pay the amount. 

           If the complainant is not interested in the product purchased from opposite   party No.2 it is the dispute between them and opposite   party No.1 is no way concerned with the said  dispute.  As such neither there is deficiency of service nor unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite   party No.1 to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed. 

            In the enquiry stage  the  complainant has  got filed her evidence affidavit   and essence of it  is in line with  the complaint averments.  She  has got exhibited mail correspondence  as A1.    Similarly for  Opposite Party No.1  the evidence affidavit of  one  Sri V.Venkatesh stated to be its   Manager –legal  is got filed  and through him  the statement of account of the complainant  salary account is got exhibited as B1   Both sides  have filed written arguments and supplemented the same with the oral submissions. 

            On a consideration of material placed on the record the following points have  fallen for determination .        

1. Whether the complainant could make out a case of either unfair trade practice  or deficiency of service on the part of  Opposite party No.1&2?
2.  Whether the complainant is entitled for the  reliefs sought for ?
3. To what relief?

Point No.1:  It is not in dispute that the complainant   maintained  the salary account  with opposite party No.1 bank  and she  also  availed  credit card facility from it.  She claims to  have accumulated 12000 and odd  points in  the transaction   by using credit card to obtain  from opposite party No.1.  She claims to have received a phone  call from head office of   Opposite party No.1 at Bombay  informing  her  that  out of 12000 and add point 8000 will be expired and  to avoid it she was asked to affect transaction with  opposite party No.2 and  credit card will be upgraded to Titanium card and believing the same she   made a purchase of product from   Opposite party No.2.  The complainant also says that  the person who made a telephone call to her informed           that amounts spent by her for the purchase of product  will be reverted back her account but he did not respond even after necessary  email conversations with opposite  party No.1&2.  As could be seen from the descriptive   particulars of the complaint  from her evidence affidavit  she is an employee and well versed with the bank transactions.  As rightly  stated by the opposite party No.1  how can the complainant believe the oral assurance  alleged to given by a person  calling from the head office of opposite party No.1 bank that after  purchase of  product by using the credit card the amount will be reverted back  into her account is not  stated.  Even  if she received  such a call on the  phone  she was expected to contact opposite party No.1 bank and find out the truth or otherwise  of alleged assurance  given to her by unknown  person in the  phone.  It is a fact that the complainant even as on today has not returned the product purchased by her from opposite party No.2 by using the credit card.  When she  accepted the product  the cost of which was paid by opposite  party No.1  how the amount  will be  remitteed by opposite  party No.1  to her.  Hence it is difficult  to believe the complainant’s version  that  on the oral assurance   that the cost of the  product  purchased by her will be credited her account  after  months time  after  receiving  by  product  online.   Complainant  made a purchase of product by using credit card and product is delivered to her  through online then  the transaction is completes unless she returns back the product for any reason. 

              The complainant having alleged collusion between opposite party  No.1&2 could not substantiate  the same.  As rightly said by   Opposite party No.1 it is not manufacturer of product  claimed to have been purchased by the complainant.  Honoring of the credit card issued to the complainant by paying  opposite party No.2 from whom the complainant  purchased  the product  does not amounts to unfair trade practice  or deficiency of service.  There is a  mail conversation from opposite party No.2  informing her that they are in the process of  reverted back into her account within 10 business working days, but not happened.  Because it  is opposite party No.2 who informed her by mail that  they will  remit the amount  to her account.  Hence  the complainant cannot maintain the present complaint against the opposite  party No.1 basing on the assurance given to the complainant she can get back the amount from opposite party No.2 that too after accepting the product received  by her.  Accordingly the point is answered against the complainant. 

Point No.2:    The complainant cannot maintain the  present complaint against the opposite party No.1 and  is not entitled to for any of the reliefs against it.   However she is entitled for refund of Rs.6,500/- from opposite party No.2 with interest thereon  at 18% P.A on receipt  of the  amount she has to return back to product  to opposite party No.2 .  The opposite party No.2 is   directed to send Rs.6,500/- with interest there on  at 18% P.A from the date of complaint to the date of payment  by remitting the same to the account of complainant   with  opposite party No.1 bank  and  on such remittance the complainant shall return the product in packed condition.

Point No.3: In the result, the complaint is allowed in part against opposite party No.2

1. Directing the opposite party No.2 to send Rs.6,500/- with interest there on  at 18% P.A from the date of complaint to the date of payment  by remitting the same to the account of complainant   with  opposite party No.1 bank. 

2 On such remittance the complainant shall return the product in packed condition.

3.   Opposite party No.2 is liable to pay a  sum of Rs.2,000/- as costs. 

4. Complaint against opposite party  No.1 is dismissed.

Time for  compliance :  30  days from the date of  receipt of this order

                              Dictated to steno transcribed and typed by her pronounced  by us on this the     19^th day of February , 2019

MEMBER                                                                                            PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Exhibits filed on behalf of the Complainant:

Ex.A1 is mail correspondences

Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party No.1

Ex.B1 is statement of account

MEMBER                                                                                            PRESIDENT