Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/617/2006

Alex Antony Joseph - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

M.Murthy

11 Dec 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   22.11.2006

                                                                        Date of Order :   11.12.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.617/2006

   MONDAY THIS 11^th DAY OF DECEMBER 2017

 

Mr. Alex Antony Joseph,

S/o. Rajarathinam,

No.4, VRD Nagar,

Mahavaram,

Opp. to KCC Bank,

Chennai – 60.                                                    Complainant

 

                                         Vs 

 

The  ICICI Bank Limited,

Credit Card Division,

Rep. by its Manager,

ICICI Tower,

Santhome High Road,

Chennai -2.                                                       Opposite party.

 

 

Counsel for Complainant         :   M/s. M.Murthy & another            

Counsel for opposite party       :   M/s. B.Karthikeyan

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as damages for deficiency in service and to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as damages for mental agony and Rs.2,000/- as cost of the complaint.

 1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

         The complainant submit that  he availed two credit cards  of  the opposite party bearing Nos. 4477 4607 0070 5009 & 4477 4607 0070 5017  and the card type is “Sterling Silver”.  The complainant found some discrepancies in the credit card statement he paid  Rs.13,503/- and Rs.18,000/- by way of cheque which was returned by the opposite party.  In the statement issued by the opposite party on 11.11.2005 there were some discrepancies and the outstanding amount is  Rs.6723.97 as per statement  and he dropped  a cheque for Rs.6724/- on 13.11.2005 in the drop box  of the opposite party,  which was encashed by opposite party and found,  the opposite party has charged late payment  fee, service tax etc.  Upon his request opposite party reversed some entries.  Despite opposite party was sending statements by adding compounding interest and other charges, the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice to opposite party on 5.9.2006.  Though they acknowledged it on 7.9.2006 no reply was made.  As such the act of  the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.  Hence this complaint is filed.

2.   The brief averments in Written Version field by the  opposite party is  as follows:

The  opposite party deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.    The opposite party state that the  complainant was having an outstanding balance of Rs.6723.97 and the complainant dropped an  undated cheque in the drop box of opposite party on 13.11.2005 and it was returned by the opposite party to the complainant  on 2.12.2005 since the cheque is without date.  The said cheque was again deposited by the complainant on 15.12.2005 and the cheque amount was realized only on 16.12.2005.  Since the complainant made delayed payment it attracts late payment charges and opposite party has charged late payment charges and service charges for the period of 13.11.2005 to 15.12.2005.   As per the procedure charged cheque bouncing charges for the cheques are dishonor of cheque and the opposite party is liable to collect the charges from the complainant.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the  opposite party and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite party filed and no documents marked on the side of the  opposite parties.

5.  The points for the consideration is: 

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards deficiency in service as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled for a sum of  Rs.50,000/- towards mental agony with cost as prayed for ?

6.  POINTS 1 & 2:

          Heard both sides.   Perused the records namely complaint, written version, proof affidavits and documents.  Both parties not turned up to advance their oral arguments for long time hence treated as no oral argument.    

7.     The complainant  pleaded and contended that he availed two credit cards  of  the opposite party bearing Nos. 4477 4607 0070 5009 & 4477 4607 0070 5017  and the card type is “Stering Slver”.  The complainant found some discrepancies in the credit card statement he paid  Rs.13503/- and Rs.18,000/- by way of cheque which was returned by the opposite party.  In the statement issued by the opposite party on 11.11.2005 there were some discrepancies and the outstanding amount is shown as Rs.6723.97 as per statement  and he dropped  a cheque for Rs.6724/- on 30.11.2005 in the drop box  of the opposite party,  which was encashed by opposite party and found,  the opposite party has charged late payment  fee, service tax etc.  His contention was when his amount was realized by opposite party  how they can charge additional amount.   Upon his request opposite party reversed some entries.  Despite opposite party was sending statements by adding compounding interest and other charges, the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice to opposite party on 5.9.2006.  Though they acknowledged it on 7.9.2006 no reply was made.  Instead of reversing the entries  the opposite party sent his collecting agents threatens the complainant  which creates mental agony.  Hence the complainant is constrained to file this complaint.

8.     The opposite party in their written arguments contended that the complainant was having an outstanding balance of Rs.6723.97 and the complainant dropped an  undated cheque in the drop box of opposite party on 30.11.2005 and it was returned by the opposite party to the complainant  on 2.12.2005 since the cheque is without date.  The said cheque was again deposited by the complainant on 15.12.2005 and the cheque amount was realized only on 16.12.2005.  Since the complainant made delayed payment it attracts late payment charges and opposite party has charged late payment charges and service charges for the period of 30.11.2005 to 15.12.2005.   In addition, opposite party   as per the procedure charged cheque bouncing charges for the cheques are dishonor of cheque and the opposite party is liable to collect the charges from the complainant.

9.     Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the  complainant is a defaulter in making payment due to the  opposite party.  Hence the complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in the complaint and the points are  answered accordingly. 

            In the result the complaint is dismissed.  No cost

          Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 11^th day  of  December 2017.  

 

 MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

 

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 12.10.2005

           11.5.2006  - Copy of credit card statements.

Ex.A2- 28.4.2006  - Copy of email representations.

Ex.A3- 5.9.2006    - Copy of legal notice.    

Opposite party’s side document:      Nil  

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.