Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/252

Tarsem Lal Sachdeva - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC - Opp.Party(s)

Ashu Mittal

28 Mar 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :              252 of 2019

Date of Institution :          11.10.2019

Date of Decision :              28.03.2023

 

1. Tarsem Lal Sachdeva son of Babu Ram
2. Sajan Sachdeva son of Tarsem Lal Sachdeva both residents of street No. 03 (L),  Balbir Basti, Faridkot, Tehsil and  District Faridkot.                            

                         .....Complainant

Versus

 

 

1. H.D.F.C. Bank, Branch Circular Road,  Near Bus Stand, Faridkot through its Branch Manager.
2. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Ellenabad through its Sub Divisional Officer.
3. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, through its Superintending Engineer, Barnala Road, Sirsa.

..........OPs

 

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

(now, under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019)

 

* * * ** * *

 

Quorum:     Smt Priti Malhotra, President,

Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member,

                     Sh Vishav Kant Garg, Member.

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

 

Present:       Sh Ashu Mittal, Ld Counsel for Complainant,

                    Sh Dildeep Singh, Ld Counsel for OP-2 & OP-3,

 OP-1 Ex-parte.

ORDER

(Priti Malhotra, President)

                                    Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions them to refund the amount of Rs.20,100/-illegally retained by them alongwith interest and for further directing them to pay Rs.50,000/-on account of compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides litigation expenses incurred by him.

 2                                              Briefly stated, the case of the complainants is that they are father and son and they are joint in funds and agriculture land situated in Sirsa is in the name of complainant no. 1.  Complainant no. 2 has account with OP-1 and also holds credit card issued by OP-1. Complainant no. 1 applied for electricity connection for his agricultural land under NDS category with OP-2 and OP-3 and paid Rs.20,100/-to them on their demand through the credit card of complainant no.2 on 29.03.2019, but system showed failure of payment and therefore, he repeated the process and this time, online system

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

showed payment of Rs.20,100/-in the account of OP-2 and OP-3. It is further submitted that on 15.04.2019, OP-1 sent bill for credit card vide which they demanded Rs.20,100/-twice in the bill. Complainant immediately approached OP-1 and requested for deduction of Rs.20,100/-only and then, complainant deposited Rs.20,100/-and thereafter, complainant sent  an e-mail to Head Office of  OP-1, but in the month of May, 2019 Op-1 again demanded Rs.41,000/-in which OP-1 earlier showed credit of amount of Rs.20,100/- but again showed debit of same amount. Complainant made several requests to OP-1, but it did not listen to his genuine request and under compulsion, he had to deposit entire amount alongwith penalty of Rs.2890.54 i.e Rs.2449.61 as financial charges and Rs.440/-on account of GST., but after some time, OP-1 refunded the amount of Rs.2449.61but did not return Rs.440.93 of GST.   After that complainant sent e-mails to OP-1, but all in vain. Complainant also sent e-mail to OP-2 and 3 to which they did not respond, but stated orally that they have received amount only once and remaining amount must be with OP-1. Complainant has approached OPs several times and made them many requests to refund the amount of Rs.20,100/- alongwith Rs.440.93 deducted for GST, but all in vain. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice and has caused

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

huge harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him besides cost of litigation. Hence, the present complaint.

3                                              Ld Counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 16.10.2019, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite parties.

4                                                          As per office report, notice containing copy of complaint alongwith relevant documents was sent to OP-1 through Process Server. It stands served, but despite several calls till 4.00 P.M., nobody appeared on date fixed on behalf of OP-1 either in person or through counsel. Statutory period expired. Therefore, vide order dated 28.01.2020, OP-1 was proceeded against exparte.

5                                                        OP-2 and OP-3 appeared in the Commission through counsel and filed written statement wherein they have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that there is

 

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

no deficiency in service on their part. it is averred that they have issued electricity connection for the agricultural land of complainant and have received the payment as per rules. It is averred that complaint is a matter of after thought and he has filed the present complaint only to achieve his ulterior motive and stated that complainant has concocted a story with malafide intention to mislead the Commission. OP-2 and OP-3 have denied all the allegations of complainant being false and baseless and have reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on their part. Prayer for dismissal of complaint with costs is made.

6                                                        Proper opportunity was given to complainants as well as OPs to lead evidence to prove their respective pleadings. Accordingly, Ld counsel for complainant tendered in evidence affidavit of complainant no. 1 as Ex.C-1, affidavit of complainant no. 2 as Ex C-2, documents Ex C-3 to Ex C-13 and then, closed the evidence on behalf of complainants.

7                                                        Despite availing several opportunities OP-2 and OP-3 did not tender any evidence. Therefore, vide order dated

 

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

09.01.2023, evidence of OP-2 and OP-3 was closed by order of this Commission.

8                                              We have heard the arguments advanced by ld Counsel for complainant as well as ld counsel for OP-2 and OP-3 and have also carefully perused and gone through the documents and evidence placed on record by respective parties.

9                                               From the careful perusal of record, it is observed that case of the complainant is that on 29.03.2019, he applied for electricity connection for his agricultural land under NDS category with OP-2 and OP-3 and made payment of requisite fees of Rs.20,100/- through the credit card. As the system showed failure, so he repeated the process and payment was made, but next month when complainant received bill of credit card, he was shocked to see that amount of Rs.20,100/-was charged twice. Complainant made payment of Rs.20,100/-, but regarding remaining amount, he sent mail to Head Office of OP-1. Again in the next month, OP-1 charged Rs.20,100/-of previous pending amount and under compelling circumstances, he had to pay Rs.20,100/-alongwith penalty of Rs.2449.61 as financial charges and Rs.440.93

 

cc no.-252 of 2019

on account of GST. After some time, OP-1 refunded Rs.2449.61, but did not refund the amount of Rs.440.93 charged on account of GST. Complainant sent e-mail to all OPs for second amount of Rs.20,100/-charged by OPs, but neither OP-1Bank nor OP-2 and 3 Electricity Department, Haryana redressed his grievance. In reply, OP-2 and 3 denied all the allegations being wrong and incorrect and prayed for redressal of his grievance.

10                                              During the course of arguments, OP-2 and OP-3 placed on record copy of cheque dated 08.08.2022 issued by OP-2 and OP-3 in the name of complainant no.1 Tarsem Lal for Rs.20,100/-.  It is observed that main dispute involved in this complaint is of Rs.20,100/-which are unnecessarily charged by OPs, but it was not sure that this amount was retained by bank or it was with OP-2 and 3. Now, with the production of this document, it is clear that OP-2 and 3 have refunded the amount of Rs.20,100/-to complainant through cheque dated 08.08.2022. Matter in dispute has been resolved and grievance of complainant has been fully resolved. Therefore, in these circumstances, complaint filed by complainant stands hereby disposed off. Meanwhile, in order to facilitate the complainant, OP-1 Bank is hereby directed

cc no.-252 of 2019

to assist the complainant in getting refund of Rs.440.93 which has been wrongly debited on account of GST. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Commission

Dated: 28.03.2023

 

(Vishav Kant Garg)       (Param Pal Kaur)    (Priti Malhotra)

  Member                         Member                    President