This is a complaint made by one Chitrak Chowdhury, son of Sukhamoy Chowdhury, 631, Baghajatin Station Road, SPD-I, 101, Jadavpur, 24-Parganas (South), PIN-700 086 against ICICI Bank Limited having its registered office at Land Mark Race Circle, Vadodara-390007 also at Euphoriea Branch, 27A, Sarat Bose Road, P.S.-Tollygunge, Kolkata-700 026, praying for (A) direction upon the OP Bank to settle the accounts of the credit card in terms of the settlement dt.8.6.2011 arrived at between the parties and also to remove the lien and also refund all amounts deducted from the Account of the Complainant as set out in the schedule, (B) compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- for adopting unfair trade practice by the OP Bank, (C) Rs.2,00,000/- for mental pain, agony and harassment suffered by the Complainant and (D) Rs.50,000/- towards costs of litigation.
Facts in brief are that Complainant has an account bearing No.130001502245 in ICICI Bank. OP is a banking company. Sometime in the year 2006 the Complainant was provided with a Credit Card by the OP Bank. Complainant states that the said Credit Card was very rarely used but due to the reason beyond control a sum of Rs.16,575/- was due and payable in respect of that Credit Card. Accordingly, the Complainant went to the OP Bank on 8.6.2011 and a settlement was arrived at between the Complainant and OP. Complainant issued three cheques as per the settlement. The first cheque was not encashed. Complainant immediately contacted the OP Bank and paid the amount of the first cheque in cash. However, the receipt of that payment went missing. In February, 2016 when Complainant went to the Bank to withdraw the amount from the Savings Bank Account he was informed that the account has been made inoperative as per direction of the Bank authorities. Further, Complainant did not receive any intimation to this effect. Thereafter, Complainant made several correspondence and even offered to make further payment of Rs.6,851/- as the receipt was not available. Further, Complainant has stated in the mid of February, 2016, he received a letter dt.28.1.2016 from the OP stating that a lien has been marked against his account. Complainant has also stated that OP Bank illegally demanded a sum of Rs.43,474.66 on account of the Credit Card. Further, Complainant has contented that the amount was settled as far back as in 2011 and the Bank cannot once again demand the money and mark lien on the Savings Bank Account of the Complainant.
Complainant, further, has stated that a sum of Rs.23,615.07 has been deducted illegally by the OP from his account without any notice. So, the act and conduct of the OP Bank is uncalled for, since claim of the OP Bank was settled as back as in 2011. Complainant expects that the Bank will furnish a true and correct account in terms of the settlement which OP intentionally failed and neglected to comply. So, Complainant filed this case.
OP ICICI Bank filed written version denying all the material allegations of the complaint. Further allegation is that Complainant defaulted in repayment of outstanding dues owed by him in respect of the Credit Card account. The aggregate amount due was Rs.59,773.91 as on My 18, 2011, which is mentioned in the Credit Card, submitted Annexure A in the month of June, 2011. Complainant was liable for paying Rs.59,773.91 upto June, 2011. OP declared that Complainant was liable to make payment of Rs.47,860/-.
Subsequently, in the month of June, 2011 Complainant approached the OP Bank and settlement was arrived. As per that settlement Complainant was asked t pay Rs.16,575/- against outstanding dues of Rs.59,773.91 and the amount of Rs.16,575/-was to be paid by the Complainant in three instalment i.e. on June 14, 2011 Rs.5,525/-, Rs.5,525/- by July 10, 2011 and Rs.5,525 on August10, 2011 Rs.5,525/-. However, these amounts were paid on June 25, 23011, June 20, 2011 and August 11, 2011.
The settlement between the parties clearly provided that if terms are not complied or if any default is made in payment or cheques issued are dishonoured, the concession provided shall stand withdrawn and the Complainant will be bound to pay the entire amount. Complainant failed to adhere the terms and conditions in the letter dt. June 8, 2011. The Complainant was liable to make payment of all the instalments within the stipulated period which he failed. That delay was to the extent of 11 days, 10 days and one day. Complainant took the OP Bank as granted and violated the agreed terms and conditions. Since Complainant violated the terms and condition he made himself liable to pay Rs.43,474.66. OP Bank made several requests to make payment of Rs.43,474.66. But, Complainant did not make payment. So, Complainant lost his right to avail the concession facility provided by the OP Bank. That is why OP Bank marked lien on the Savings Bank Account of the Complainant and deducted Rs.23,617.07. Still Rs.19,859.59 is due to be paid by the Complainant. Complainant is defaulter and he is not entitled to the concession which OP Bank has agreed. So, OP Bank prayed for dismissal of this complaint.
Decision with reasons
Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief wherein he has reiterated the facts mentioned in the complaint petition. Against this OP Bank has filed questionnaire to which Complainant has filed affidavit-in-reply. Similarly, OP ICICI Bank has filed evidence on affidavit against which Complainant has filed questionnaire to which OP has filed affidavit-in-reply. Both the parties have filed written arguments.
Main point for determination is whether the Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the prayer portion of the complaint petition, it appears that Complainant has prayed for a direction upon the OP Bank to settle the accounts of the Credit Card in terms of the settlement dt.8.6.2011 arrived at between the parties and also to remove the lien and also refund all amounts deducted from the account of the Complainant as set out in the schedule. So, prayer (A) consists of three parts. The first part is for a direction upon the OP Bank to settle the accounts of the Credit Card in terms of the settlement dated 8.6.2011. In this regard, it appears that Complainant violated the terms of the settlement which was arrived at between them for paying Rs.16,575/- in three instalments. On perusal of Annexure A, it appears that payment was made by the Complainant with delay of 11 days, 10 days and one day. Now Complainant contends that this delay is nominal in nature and he should be given an opportunity to make payment as per this settlement.
On the contrary, OP alleges that Complainant violated the terms intentionally and no ground is furnished as to why he made delayed payment. Since Complainant violated the terms and conditions, he is not entitled to any relief and as per the terms he is bound to pay the total amount mentioned in the Credit Card which is Rs.43,474.66.
Further allegation of the OP is that since Complainant did not comply the terms of the settlement, it was compelled to exercise lien on the Savings Bank Account of the Complainant and deducted the amount of Rs.23,617.07 since 2011 almost five years elapsed and after this period Complainant filed this complaint for a direction upon the OP ICICI Bank to settle the accounts in terms of the settlement dt.8.6.2011. Contention of Complainant is that when he went to operate his Bank after five years he found that the amount was deducted from it and lien has been marked upon his Savings Bank Accounts. No doubt that delay made by the Complainant does not appear to be a delay which could not have been explained. But, that would have been in the year 2011 or 2012, of course that explanation as to why the delay was caused. But, Complainant did not chose that and remained sitting idle for five years and now seeks a direction upon the OP for settling the accounts of Credit Card in terms of settlement of 8.6.2011. Admittedly, Complainant has violated the terms and so he lost his opportunity of getting the advantage or concession which OP extended towards him.
In our view such a customer or consumer losses their right to get relief from this Forum also because they did not care for the terms and conditions which was settled by him with the OP. And, if this Forum provides relief to the Complainant it will be a precedent and all the consumers will take recourse of such practice which appears to be unwarranted.
Accordingly, we are of the view that Complainant since defaulted in payment in the instalments in terms of the settlement arrived at on 8.6.2011 is not entitled to the relief which has been prayed by him in prayer (A).
Second of this prayer is for removal of the lien and also refund the amount which was deducted from the Savings Bank Account. Right to lien is a statutory right and all Banking institutions have been provided with it. Since Complainant did not comply the terms of the settlement OP having no other alternative, exercised its right to lien and deducted the amount. As such, there does not appear any ground to remove the lien and also pass an order for refund of the amount which was deducted by the OP Banker.
Prayer (B) is compensation to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-. Since Complainant failed to prove his allegation provided in the complaint is not entitled to any compensation. Because he failed to prove that OP adopted unfair trade practice.
Complainant has prayed for compensation for mental pain, agony and harassment. There is no ground mentioned in the complaint petition which entitles Complainant to the relief of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and harassment. So, this prayer is also rejected.
Prayer (D) is litigation cost to the extent of Rs.50,000/-. Since Complainant failed to prove any allegation law is settled that unless the allegation is vindicated cost cannot be awarded.
Hence,
ordered
CC/195/2016 and the same is dismissed on contest.
