In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No.373/2011
1) Rajesh Gupta,
Flat No.D-1, 5, Camac Street, Kolkata-17. ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) ICICI Bank Ltd. ICICI Phone Banking Center,
ICICI Bank Tower, 7th Floor, Survey No.115/27,
Plot No.12, Nanakramguda, Serlilingampally,
Hyderabad, having its branch office at
127-A, Sarat Bose Road,
P.S. Tollygunge, Kolkata-26. ---------- Opposite Party
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.
Order No. 16 Dated 22-05-2013.
The case of the complainant in short is that complainant is a businessman by profession and as such the complainant needed to avail of credit card services. Complainant availed of 2 credit cards, bearing nos. 4477 4735 1805 9006 and 4023 6845 2703 5006 respectively. The former card was issued in 2004 and the latter, which goes by the name of ‘Further Card’, was issued in 2008.
On 21.12.10 the complainant received the monthly statement of the said credit card, which revealed interalia, the following transactions:
i) A transaction for Rs.60,650/- with Newstar Gems, Sodepur dt.4.12.10;
ii) A transaction for Rs.87.675/- with Newstar Gems, Sodepur dt.7.12.10 and
iii) A transaction for Rs.25,500/- with Aakaash, Rathtala, Kolkata dt.7.12.10.
Complainant states that he never used the said credit card for making any of the aforesaid transactions and he denied the aforesaid transactions and issued a letter through fax on 21.12.10 to the Manager of o.p. bank requesting him to raise a dispute against the aforesaid disputed transactions and process credit and/or temporary credit against the disputed transactions. Many electronic mail correspondences were exchanged by and between the complainant and different officers of o.p. bank.
In course of further communications, o.p. bank sent the merchant’s slip against the first two disputed transactions to the complainant. The merchant slips and/or charge slips were not signed by the complainant. The merchant slips and/or charge slips did not bear the name of the complainant and the merchant slips and/or charge slips did not bear the expiry date of the said credit card.
On 28.3.11 the complainant received an electronic mail from the o.p. bank instructing the complainant to make a payment of Rs.1,55,071.32 which included the disputed amounts of the first two transactions along with finance and other charges and which were purportedly resolved in favour of the o.p. bank. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.
O.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.p. in the course of argument submitted that the case has got no merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Decision with reasons:
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainant is a businessman by profession and as such the complainant needed to avail of credit card services. Complainant availed of 2 credit cards, bearing nos. 4477 4735 1805 9006 and 4023 6845 2703 5006 respectively. The former card was issued in 2004 and the latter, which goes by the name of ‘Further Card’, was issued in 2008.
We further find from the record that on 21.12.10 the complainant received the monthly statement of the said credit card, which revealed interalia, the following transactions:
i) A transaction for Rs.60,650/- with Newstar Gems, Sodepur dt.4.12.10;
ii) A transaction for Rs.87.675/- with Newstar Gems, Sodepur dt.7.12.10 and
iii) A transaction for Rs.25,500/- with Aakaash, Rathtala, Kolkata dt.7.12.10.
Complainant states that he never used the said credit card for making any of the aforesaid transactions and he denied the aforesaid transactions and issued a letter through fax on 21.12.10 to the Manager of o.p. bank requesting him to raise a dispute against the aforesaid disputed transactions and process credit and/or temporary credit against the disputed transactions. Many electronic mail correspondences were exchanged by and between the complainant and different officers of o.p. bank.
It is seen from the record that in course of further communications, o.p. bank sent the merchant’s slip against the first two disputed transactions to the complainant. The merchant slips and/or charge slips were not signed by the complainant. The merchant slips and/or charge slips did not bear the name of the complainant and the merchant slips and/or charge slips did not bear the expiry date of the said credit card.
It transpires from the record that on 28.3.11 the complainant received an electronic mail from the o.p. bank instructing the complainant to make a payment of Rs.1,55,071.32 which included the disputed amounts of the first two transactions along with finance and other charges and which were purportedly resolved in favour of the o.p. bank.
In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that o.p. had sufficient deficiency as it appears from the record as against the claim charged from the complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.
Hence, ordered,
That the case is allowed on contest with cost against the o.p. O.p. is directed to reverse all the claims against the two credit cards, referred to above, claimed from the complainant and is further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) for harassment and mental agony and lit6igation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties free of cost.
