BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

DATED 31^st DAY OF JANUARY 2024

ORDER

SMT. SUMA ANILKUMAR, MEMBER

The complaint filed U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act 2019, complainant seeking direction towards OP for the following reliefs:-

1. To award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards causing mental agony, harassment, hardship and financial constrains.
2. To pay sum of Rs.30,000/- towards legal expenses for this complaint.
3. Such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Commission deems fit in the circumstance of the case in the interest in justice and equity.

2. Brief facts of this case are as follows:-

The OP No.1 is a prominent financial institution, which was formed in the year 1994 as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India, which is now prominently known as ICICI bank. ICICI Bank is one of the financial institutions who is providing medium term and long term project financing, diversified financial services offering a wide variety of products and services. Currently, this bank is a leading private sector bank in India, with a network of 5,534 branches across India.

3. The complainant, who had procured the credit card services from the OP since January 2022 till date. The complainant holds a credit card with the OP under the account number 4315812882252000. As per the terms and conditions agreed, the complainant authorized the bank to set up automatic debits from his credit card to pay for specific bills and services on the date due. The complainant also holds a Savings Bank account No. 029601524988 in Rajajinagar Branch in Bangalore, of OPs.

4. The complainant submits that the used the credit card service of the OP and made purchases for a sum of Rs.26,473.00/- which was due on 30^th June 2023. That on every month the amount due gets auto debited on the due date from the complainant’s savings bank account No.029601524988 which is operated at the OPs Rajajinagar Branch. That on 30^th June 2023 the complainant had made the payment of Rs.40,630/- to account of Credit card No.4315812882252000 which included the due amount of Rs.26,473.00/- and the value of purchases made subsequently. Thereafter, on 03.07.2023, the due amount of Rs.26,473.00/- which was already paid on 30^th June 2023, was again auto-debited from the complainant’s savings bank account No.029601524988. The complainant further submits that the OP cannot lawfully auto-debited the amount repeatedly once the due amount has been paid. The said action of the OP is against their own protocols and rules and good faith.

5. Thereafter, the complainant after knowing that the OP has auto-debited the complainant’s savings bank account to the tune of Rs.26,473.00/- the complainant immediately raised this issue before the OP Rajajinagar branch, Bangalore. But to his shock and dismay they shrugged their responsibility by informing the complainant that the said amount is credited to credit card account and the complaint has to spend the money using the credit card and the amount cannot be withdrawn as cash without being subject to high finance charges. The OP also mentioned that they cannot credit the unlawfully debited amount back to his savings bank account for the reasons best known to them. The complainant further submits that he is naturally dissatisfied with the service rendered by the OP as the amount which was due and ought to be paid by him to the OP was already paid. In spite of the payment being made separately, the amount was again auto-debited from the complainant’s savings bank account. 

6. Since this mischief was done by the OP in the beginning of the month (3^rd July 2023). This caused the complainant immense mental trauma and financial constraints. Due to the deficiency of service caused by the OP, the complainant had to face hardship in making payments towards his house rent, Income tax, and other regular house hold expenses. Even though the OPs being a banking institution operating from public money, it has exhibited that it is insensitive to the customers grievances, even though going under the slogan “Khayal Apka” which are mere words. The OP did not abide by their own terms and conditions governing credit card facilities. Complainant  had made numerous attempts to address this issue with the OPs Rajajinagar Branch in Bangalore and the Credit Card Department. However, the problem has not been resolved till date. This lack of concern towards the complainant grievance and failure to rectify the situation, which could have been resolved easily, has severely affected the complainant’s trust and confidence in the OPs. Hence this complaint by the complainant.

7. On Issue of notice to OP, the OP filed its version.

8. In the version of OP, OP submits that the complainant has willfully made false allegations, knowing that they are false, with the malafaide intention of securing unlawful gains and hence, the complainant has not come before this Commission with clean hands. Accordingly, the complainant suffers seriously from laches. OP admits to the fact that the complainant had availed a credit card with the OP bank on 20.01.2022. Further, the complainant has executed the credit card application form. It is further submitted that the monthly statement cycle for the subject credit card operated from 12^th of a month till 12^th of next month, i.e. the statement is generated on 12^th of every month and the due date for payment is the last day of that month. Per the records with the OP, the complainant made a payment of Rs.40,360/- on 30.06.2023 towards the Credit Card number as stated by him in the complaint which included the due amount of Rs.26,473/-. The amount of Rs.26,473/- was auto-debited from the Savings Bank Account No.029601524988 towards the Credit Card number as stated by him in the complaint which included the due amount of Rs.26,473/-. The amount of Rs.26,473/- was auto-debited from the Savings Bank account No.029601524988 towards credit card payment on 03.07.2023. Further, the OP specifically submits that the said amount debited through auto-debit was reinstated as a positive credit balance in the credit card and the complainant has further utilized the said limits also. This can be evidenced from the credit card statements from 03.07.2023 onwards (“Credit Card Statements”). Based on complainant’s request, auto-debit facility was activated for the outstanding dues of credit card, which was connected with his savings bank account No.029601524988.

9. The OP specifically submits as follows:-

i) As per statement dated June 12, 2023 there was a closing balance of Rs.27,873.00/- for which due date was June 30, 2023.

ii) As per the said June 2023 statement, the complainant’s due date was 30^th June 2023 and as per page no.9 of MITC, the complaint was required to make the payment before the due date i.e. by 29^th June, 2023 in this case. The clause reads as “If customer has registered for Auto Debit Credit Card Statement (i.e. statement generated on July 12, 2023). Further, the savings account statements attached as Document No.5, also shows that he has no made any payments towards the credit card utilizations between July 3, 2023 to July 12, 2023 despite utilizing INR Rs.17,599/- during this period and even as per the Credit Card Statement, there no auto-debit in the month of July 2023. It is specifically submitted that after the credit limit was reinstated for the auto-debited amount of INR. 26,473/-, the complainant already utilized the said limits, as can be seen from the credit card statements. Accordingly, there is no question of any deficiency in service.

It is further submitted, that as per the Credit-Card Statement dated April 12, 2023, March 12, 2023 and August, since the complainant made payments before the due dates, auto-debit was not initiated. This also clearly shows that is the complainant had made the payment before the due date, the auto debit would not have happened. Alternatively if the complainant had sufficient balance on the due date when the auto debit was processed, i.e. morning of 30^th June, 2023, the auto debit would have been successful and the auto-debit would not have automatically shifted to next working day, i.e. July 03, 2023.

10. At the cost of repetition, it is submitted that the complainants are not entitled for any relief/money that has been claimed for by them and all those allegations in the complaint that are not expressly traversed herein above are denied as false and the complainants are put t strict proof thereof and it shall not be presumed that the OP has admitted such allegations. As per the T&Cs, the complainant has agreed that the dispute should be resolved through mediation first and if the meditation is not complete within 21 days, it was required to be referred to for arbitration. Further, the seat of arbitration is also Mumbai. Therefore, it facility towards Credit Card Payment and has selected Minimum amount due option then the same will be executed on the due date provided no amount is paid by the customer before due date.

11. Since the complainant did not make the payment before the due date, as per the process of OP, an auto debit mandate was triggered on the morning of due date (i.e. June 30, 2023 in this case). As evident from the account statement submitted by the complainant, since complainant’s account did not have sufficient balance when the auto-debit mandated was processed in the morning of due date (i.e. Friday, 30^th June, 2013.), the same was automatically re-scheduled for next working day being Monday, i.e. July 03, 2023.

12. In the meantime, the complainant subsequently made the payment of for INR Rs.40,630/- at the end of the due date i.e. at 7:37 pm on 30^th June, 2023, for the reasons best known to him and without checking with the OP. It is submitted that if the complainant had checked with OP before making such payment, OP would have informed that the auto-debit payment would be processed on next date and there is no requirement for him to make the payment. Since the payment was done by the complainant at the night of due date instead of before the due date in breach of the MITC, and in the meantime the auto debit (which failed on the due date i.e. 30^th June, 2023 due to insufficient funds) also got automatically executed on the next working day i.e. 3^rd July, 2023.

13. Further, as stated above, the said amount debited through auto-debit of INR Rs.26,473/- was reinstated as a positive credit balance in the credit card. This can be seen from the Credit Card Statement, whereby the complaint utilized an amount of INR Rs.17,599/- between July 03, 2023 till July 12, 2023 which was not returned by him since there was a positive credit balance of Rs.9,160.80/- as can be evidenced from page 3 of the is humbly submitted that this Hon’ble Commission does not have the jurisdiction and the complainant ought to have resolved the dispute as per the said mediation and arbitration clause in Mumbai. Hence, the complaint filed by the complainant is frivolous, baseless and is liable to be dismissed.

14. The complainant has filed A/E along with 3 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3. OP No.1 is branch of OP No.2, both are one and the same, hence taken as OP commonly. OP filed their A/E along with 6 documents marked as Ex.R.1 and Ex.R.6. Complainant submits both oral and written arguments, OP arguments are taken as Nil.

15. On the basis of above pleadings for our consideration are as follows:-

i) Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service on the part of OPs?

ii) Whether complainant is entitled for the relief?

iii) What order?

16.  Our answers to the above points are as follows:-

Point No.1:- Affirmative.

Point No.2:- Partly Affirmative.

Point No.3:- As per the final order.

                      REASONS

17. Point No.1&2:- These points are inter-connected to each other and for the sake of convenience, to avoid repetition of facts, these points are taken up together for common discussion.

18. On perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant it clearly shows that the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.40,630.80/- towards the ICICI credit card dated 30.06.2023 and also an amount of Rs.26,473/- is being auto debited to the credit card on 03.07.2023. The OP also admits to the fact that the complainant has paid Rs.40,630.80/- towards credit card on 30.06.2023 and also an amount of Rs.26,473/- is been auto debited to the same credit card account. Therefore this clearly shows that the complainant has tried to pay the amount within the time period and the complainant has paid twice towards the same due. The OP states that the said amount is debited through auto debit i.e. Rs.26,473/- is reinstated as positive credit, balance in the credit card and also the complainant has utilized an amount of Rs.17,599/- between 03.07.2023 till 12.07.2023 which is not returned by the complainant, and there is a positive credit balance of Rs.9,160.80/-. In banks, the issue of Credit Card to the customers is the amount of the bank which is credited for the convenience of the customer in assurance to that the consumer would repay it in monthly installments (EMI). In the same way banks also issue Debit Cards to the customers against the account held by the consumer which is the amount deposited by the customer/consumer in his account. The OP bank has issued a credit card to the complainant which is used by the complainant for the convenience and is been repaid accordingly in time by the complainant. On delay or non repayment of the amount within the time mentioned by the bank, the bank will charge exorbitant fine to the customer/consumer on the said payment. The complainant here has tried to pay the amount in time to avoid the fine or other complications that might arise due to late payment but as he had already opted for an auto debit system to operate monthly towards his credit card account, there being holiday in between, the amount of RS.26,473/- has been auto debited by the bank system. Thus complainant paid twice towards the same due of his Credit Card. The OP had to reinstate the amount into the account of the complainant but instead, reinstated it as positive credit balance towards the credit card. This shows negligence and unfair trade practice by the OP. The amount that was auto debited by the complainant is the amount of the complainant and which had to be debited towards his account as he had already paid it well within the time period given to him. Hence the OP has shown clear deficiency in service and is liable to reinstate amount of RS.26,473/- towards the bank account of the complainant and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- as compensation, and Rs.5,000/- towards litigation cost.

19. Point No.3:- In view of the discussion referred above, we proceed to pass the following:-

                                   ORDER

1. Complaint filed by the complainant U/S 35 of Consumer Protection Act, is hereby allowed in part.
2. OP is directed to reinstate amount of Rs.26,473/- towards the bank account.
3. OP shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation within 30 days from the date of order, failing which OP shall pay interest of 10% p.a on Award amount till realization.
4. Furnish the copies of the order and return the extra copies of pleadings and documents to the parties, with no cost

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Open Commission on this 31^st day of JANUARY, 2024)

Documents produced by the Complainant-P.W.1 are as follows:

Documents produced by the representative of opposite party – R.W.1;