In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 49/2010

1)                   Sri Partha Sarathi Sinha,

51B, Garpar Road, Kolkata-9.                                                              ---------- Complainant

---Versus---

1)                   ICICI Bank Ltd. (Formerly ICICI Ltd.),

3A, Gurusaday Road, P.S. Karaya, Kolkata-19

2)                   The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd.

Rishikesh Building, Ashutosh Chowdhury Avenue,

Kolkata-19,  P.S. Karaya 

3)                   The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd.

Vivekananda Road Branch,

Vivekananda Road, Kolkata-6,  P.S. Jorasanko.                                         ---------- Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member

                        Smt. Sharmi Basu, Member

Order No.   27    Dated  21/11/2012.

            The petition of complaint has been filed by the complainant Sri Partha Sarthi Sinha against the o.ps. ICICI Bank Ltd. The case of the complainant in short is that complainant has two savings bank accounts with o.p. no.1 being account nos.627701156393 and 003401513698 and has been maintaining the same regularly with the said o.p. no.1. Out of the aforesaid two accounts of the complainant one was his salary account which was opened sometimes in Oct. 2004 and the other was joint account with his wife which was opened sometimes in Sept.2007. Immediately after opening of the salary account of the complainant with the o.p. the complainant was approached by the men and agents of the o.p. for taking such card of the o.p. and after a lot persuasions made by and on behalf of the men and agents of the o.ps. the complainant agreed to take one of the aforesaid cards sometimes in the month of June, 2004.

            Initially the complainant was not even aware of the mode of user of the said card and despite the fact that the complainant was charged wrongly by the o.p. on the account of the aforesaid card the complainant used to make payment in terms of the monthly statements raised by the o.ps. against the complainant and there was no default in any manner whatsoever on  the said account and that is why the complainant was sent one more credit card by the o.p. sometimes in the month of April, 2007 and another sometimes in the month of January, 2008. In this connect ion it may be stated herein that the complainant never requested the o.ps. to issue the aforesaid two cards being issued in favour of the complainant in the year 2007 and 2008 and on the contrary the complainant on receipt of the same asked the o.ps. on their toll free number to take back the aforesaid cards but they insisted the complainant to use the same the pretext that since he has received the same he will have to pay a lot charges here and there towards the cancellation of the aforesaid cards and under these circumstances the complainant started making use of the aforesaid cards. Complainant never made any intentional default in making payment of the minimum dues as raised against the monthly statements against the aforesaid cards being issued in favour of the complainant, which will be revealed from the monthly statements raised by the o.p. against the aforesaid cards.

            On almost all occasions the cheque being issued by the complainant against the statements raised for a particular month the cheque was deliberately produced at a belated state so that the complainant can charged delayed payment charges and also the interest and penalty on the same though the chque was dropped by the complainant in the drop box in due time. The complainant was also charged wrongly on the account of the interest by the o.ps. It is further stated that it appeared from the statements that the complainant was also charged higher rate of interest than that of th e actual contractual rate at the time issuance of the said credit cards. The complainant had already made an excess payment ofRs.,12,000/- against his usage of the said cards and still the complainant was being demanded money against the said cards.

            Complainant further states that the complainant all on a sudden noticed sometimes in Aug. 2009, when the complainant went to withdraw money from his savings account ATM that the aforesaid accounts of the complainant was liened by the o.ps. taking advantage of the fact that the said accounts were maintained with the o.ps. and money was withdrawn from the said accounts of he complainant by the o.ps. for the alleged payment of the alleged dues of the credit cards of the complainant. in this connection it may be stated herein that the complainant neither h ad given ECS authorization nor had issued any document allowing the o.ps. to go for the aforesaid transaction. Complainant was informed that an amount of Rs.1,05,000/- was lying due and payable to the o.ps. by the complainant though nothing was given in writing to the complainant by them. In this connection it may be stated herein that in terms of the statements made in para 11 hereinabove the  complainant has already made an excess payment of Rs.12,000/- against his usage of the said cards and hence there was no question of the aforesaid amount being payable to the o.ps. by the complainant. After repeated requests the o.ps. did not pay heed for redressal of his disputes. Hence the case was filed by complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

            All the o.ps. had entered their appearance in this case by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them as well as stating that the complainant has no cause of action to file this case and prayed for dismissal of the case. Ld. lawyer of o.ps. in the course of argument submitted that the instant case has not got any merit at all and this is a vexatious one and 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 three credit cards stood in the name of the complainant and complainant had two S.B. A/C out of which one stood in t he name of the complainant as salary account and another stood in the name of complainant and his wife.

            It is further evident from the record that o.p. has issued three credit cards in the name of the complainant without any security and o.ps. realized the amount as against three credit cards from two savings bank account without prior notice to the complainant and at the same time o.ps. failed to prove any notice to that effect. It is surprising to take note that o.ps. did not furnish any monthly statements of account to the complainant which is unjust and improper.

            In view of the findings above we are of the views that o.ps. had sufficient deficiencies being service provider to their consumer / complainant and complainant is entitled to relief.

Hence, ordered,

That the case is allowed on contest with cost against all the o.ps. O.ps. are directed to reverse Rs,1,05,000/- (Rupees one lakh five thousand) only from the account of the complainant and are directed to deposit Rs.29,241/- (Rupees twenty nine thousand two hundred forty one) only in the account of the complainant for illegal transfer of aforesaid fixed deposit and are further directed to credit a sum of Rs.1,14,989/- (Rupees one lakh fourteen thousand nine hundred eighty nine) only for illegal deduction of interest and penalty in the account of the complainant and to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees two thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% 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.