View 6486 Cases Against ICICI Bank
View 29123 Cases Against Icici
Manoj Kumar filed a consumer case on 19 Apr 2018 against ICICI Bank Ltd. in the New Delhi Consumer Court. The case no is CC/728/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 24 Jul 2018.
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI
(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1STFLOOR,
VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,
NEW DELHI-110002.
Case No.CC/728/16 Dated:
In the matter of:-
Manoj Kumar
R/o G-31, First Floor
Flat No. 1, Aruna Park
Shakarpur
Delhi-110092
….............Complaintnat
Versus
(through its Manager)
9A, Phelps Building,
Inner Circle, Connaught Place,
New Delhi-110001,
Senior General Manager,
ICICI Bank Limited
Head Credit Card & Personal Loans
.…… Opposite Parties
ORDER
H.M. VYAS, MEMBER
The gist of the complaint is that the complainant is holder of ICICI bank visa credit card no. 4501720121850001 in his name. On 29/11/2016 some fraudulent/unauthorized transaction of USD $1661.38 took place and almost after one hour another transaction of USD $1,366.20 took place at Atlanta (USA) for which the complainant received SMS. The complainant immediately tried to contact the bank on phone and 17 call details has been mentioned. Finally, having no subsequent response from the OP bank, he was able to block the credit card on 30/11/2016 through its customer care centre, It is alleged that credit card was physically possessed by him, whereas, unauthorized and fraudulent transactions took place at Atlanta (USA). A continuous persuasion with the OPs did not yield response. It is alleged that the complainant never requested for issuance of credit card with international usage facilities and the card was never used internationally and that the OPs are deficient in service as the transaction could not have been under taken carried out without sharing the confidential information of the complainant with some other persons.
During the pendency of the complaint an application for amendment for the complaint was made to incorporate that the amount of Rs. 216407.28/- has been permanently remitted in favour of complainant by the OPs concerning the fraudulent/unauthorized transaction and prayed for withdrawal of 1st prayer of the compliant. The amendment is not opposed by OP.
Following prayer has been made after amendment application was allowed:-
The OP did not file the written statement, however, chose to argue on 11/03/2018 and stated that the complaint is pre mature as it was filed during the period of investigation by the OPs on the transactions and the complainant was informed that the investigation will be over by 06/05/2017. Even prior to expiry of the said period i.e. up to 06/05/2017, the OPs have permanently credited/remitted the said amount to the complainant and, therefore, no cause of action survive concerning the present complaint or any subsequent action thereafter.
We have given due consideration to the material placed before us and the arguments addressed with relevant provisions of law.
The undisputed facts are that there were some transactions which was complained of by the complainant to the OP. The OP remitted the entire amount of Rs. 2,16,407.28/- of the alleged disputed transaction finally prior to 06/05/2017 as also admitted by the complainant. From the fact that the amount was permanently remitted by the OP it is clear that the OPs admit that the unauthorized transaction had been carried in USA against the credit card of the complainant.
The issue now remains is regarding the time period consumed in remittance of the amount concerning the disputed transaction and the harassment caused to the complainant. The OP has neither filed reply nor placed any document showing the outcome of the investigation with regard to the disputed transaction for the reasons known to them. We refrain from observing in absence of any record qua the issue as to how and from whom the confidential information of the complainant leaked resulting in such fraudulent/ disputed transaction yet the OP could not absolved of its primary responsibility for keep the confidential record/information secret and providing response to such complaint without delay and with serious responsibility. In the peculiar facts & circumstances of this case we therefore hold the OP to be guilty of gross deficiency in services qua the undenied position that the amount of disputed transactions was remitted in favour of the complainant; the complainant in the late night on 29/11/2016 was made to continued calling the bank official with no remedial response of the transaction of a sum of Rs. More than 2 Lacs and had to undergo undue distress and mental agony for hours together and could get the card blocked at 00.01 A.M. on 30/11/2016 with great difficulty through Customer Care Centre. In view of position discussed above, we award a sum of Rs. 40,000/- in favour of the complainant payable by the OP within 30 days from the date of receipt to this order. The litigation charges of Rs. 11,000/- is also awarded in favour of the complainant. In case of failure of OP to comply the orders within the specified period, interest of 10% per annum on the awarded amount of Rs. 40,000/- shall be payable beyond one month till the date of realization.
Copy of the order may be forwarded to the parties to the case free of cost as statutorily required.
Announced in open Forum on 19/04/2018 .
The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in.
File be consigned to record room.
(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)
PRESIDENT
(NIPUR CHANDNA) (H M VYAS)
MEMBER MEMBER
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.