Date of Filing : 24.01.2012
Date of Order : 17.02.2016.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)
2nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3
PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L., : PRESIDENT
DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II
C.C.NO.59/2012
WEDNESDAY THIS 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016
Mr. Biswarup Chanda,
Residing at 3-D West Moor,
Fairmont Garden,
3/160, Mount Poonamallee Road,
(Beside MIOT Hospital) Manapakkam,
Chennai 600 089. ..Complainant
..Vs..
1. The Manager,
ICICI Bank Limited,
ICICI Bank Towers,
S.No.115/27, Plot No.12,
Nanakram Guda, Serilingampally,
Hyderabad 500 032.
2. The Branch Manager,
ICICI Bank Ltd.,
Santhome Branch,
NO.249, R.K. Mutt Road,
R.A.Puram,
Chennai 600 028. ..Opposite parties.
For the Complainant : M/s. K.R. Ramesh Kumar
For the Opposite parties : M/s. S.Namasivayam & other
Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986. The complaint is filed seeking direction against the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.9719/ with interest and also to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and to pay costs of the complaint to the complainant.
ORDER
THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT
1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-
The complainant had originally Silver credit card account facility bearing No.4477 4602 4046 7003 with 2nd opposite party bank and also availed loan facility of Rs.51,000/- which has to be repaid on monthly EMIs for the period of 12 months. The complainant also uses to pay the said EMIs to the opposite parties. During August 2004, the said Silver credit card account was converted into gold credit card account bearing No.4477 4701 9377 5005. According to the complainant in addition to the said silver credit card account the complainant was compelled to avail another Gold Credit card account by the opposite parties. Further the complainant was also maintained another account with 1st opposite party namely Salary Savings account.
2. Further the complainant submitted that he has foreclosed the Silver Credit Card Account by paying balance amount of Rs.9417/- in the month of July 2005 and closed the said account and also contended that he has never used the Gold Credit Card account as such he is not liable to pay any amount for the said account, whereas the opposite parties have demanded the complainant by sending statement of accounts stating amounts are due by the complainant under the said account, against which the complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite parties before the ombudsman proceedings, the said account was ordered to be revised as such the complainant has nothing to pay as due to the opposite parties on the said credit card accounts. The opposite parties have debited a sum of Rs.9719.48 on 29-11-2008 from the savings account of the complainant maintained with the 1st opposite party which is alleged to be unlawful and illegal. As such the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service and complainant has claimed refund of the said amount with compensation and litigation expenses against the opposite parties
Written Version of opposite parties are briefly as follows:
3. The opposite parties denies all the averments and allegation contained in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted herein. The opposite parties submit that the original Silver Credit card account was subsequently converted as Gold Credit Card account in which the complainant has obtained loan for a sum of Rs.51,000/- as stated above agreeing to repay the same for the period of 12 EMIs. After paying EMIs by the complainant for some months part loan amount was due, the original silver Credit Card account was converted into Gold Credit Card Account and the said part amounts were carried to this account and complainant has paid a sum of Rs.9417/- in the month of July 2004 and the same was credited in the said account, the said account was not fore closed in the month of July 2004. Further according to the terms and conditions for availing of said credit card loans apart from the loan availed by the complainant, is also liable to pay service charges, charges for late payment etc. Accordingly for the dues under the said account by the complainant the monthly statement of accounts were then and there sent to the complainant and the complainant also aware of the same. In respect of some service charges imposed on the account of the complainant, the complainant has filed complaint before the ombudsman proceedings, as per the same ombudsman proceedings order a sum of Rs.2600/- ordered to be deducted in the account of the complainant, as such the said amount was also deducted as extra charges in the complainant’s credit card account in the month of September 2005. As on 11.09.2005 the complainant was due to the bank a sum of Rs.5935.63, as per the statement of account for the month of September 2005. After that the complainant had not paid any amount towards the credit card account as per the terms and conditions the other dues for the said amount in the said account like service charge and interest were accrued and as on 08.05.2007 is due to the bank a sum of Rs.9719.98 the said amount was deducted from the salary’s saving account on the basis of the right available under the lien banking rules. As such there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and complaint is to be liable to be dismissed.
4. Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and Ex.A1 to Ex.A13 were marked on the side of the complainant. Proof affidavit of Opposite parties are filed and Ex.B1 & Ex.B2 were marked on the side of the opposite parties.
5. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs asked for?.
6. POINTS 1 & 2 : -
Perused the complaint filed by the complainant, the written version filed by the opposite parties, proof affidavits filed by both parties and the documents Ex.A1 to A13 filed on the side of complainant and Ex.B1 and Ex.B2 filed on the side of opposite parties, considered both sides arguments.
7. There is no disputes that the complainant had originally availed
Silver credit card account facility bearing No.4477 4602 4046 7003 with 2nd opposite party bank and also availed loan facility of Rs.51,000/- which has to be repaid on monthly EMIs for the period of 12 months. The complainant also used to pay the said EMIs to said opposite parties. During August 2004, the said Silver credit card account was converted into gold credit card account bearing No.4477 4701 9377 5005. According to the complainant in addition to the said silver credit card account the complainant was compelled to avail another Gold Credit card account by the opposite parties. The same is denied by the opposite parties, however as per the records available in this proceeding, as contended by the opposite parties the original Silver credit card facility was converted into Gold credit card facility is acceptable. Further the complainant was also maintained an another account with 1st opposite party namely Salary Savings account, but no particulars were furnished by both the parties before this forum about the said salary savings account.
8. The main grievance in the complaint attributed against the opposite parties by the complainant in the complaint is that the complainant has foreclosed the Silver Credit Card Account by paying balance amount of Rs.9417/- in the month of July 2005 and closed the said account and also contended that he has never used the Gold Credit Card account as such he is not liable to pay any amount for the said account, whereas the opposite parties have demanded the complainant by sending statement of accounts mentioned the amounts are due by the complainant under the said account, against which the complainant has filed the complaint against the opposite parties before the ombudsman proceedings, the said account was ordered to be revised as such the complainant has nothing to pay as due to the opposite parties on the said credit card accounts, and further contented contrary to the above said fact the opposite parties have debited a sum of Rs. 9719/- on 29.11.2008 from the savings account of the complainant maintained with the 1st opposite party which is alleged to be unlawful and illegal as such the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service and complainant has claimed refund of the said amount with compensation and litigation expenses against the opposite parties.
9. Whereas the opposite parties has contended that the original Silver Credit card account was subsequently converted as Gold Credit Card account in which the complainant has obtained loan for a sum of Rs.51,000/- as stated above agreeing to repay the same for the period of 12 EMIs. After paying EMIs by the complainant for some months, the balance loan amount was due in the original silver Credit Card account which was brought into Gold Credit Card Account and the said part amounts were carried to this account and complainant has paid a sum of Rs.9417/- in the month of July 2004 and the same was credited in the said account contrary to this the said account was not fore closed in the month of July 2004. Further according to the terms and conditions for availing of said credit card loans apart from the loan availed by the complainant, is also liable to pay service charges, charges for late payment etc. Accordingly for the dues under the said account by the complainant the monthly statement of accounts were then and there sent to the complainant and the complainant also aware of the same. In respect of the some the services charges imposed on the account of the complainant, the complainant has filed complaint before the ombudsman proceedings, as per the same ombudsman proceedings order a sum of Rs.2600/- ordered to be deducted in the account of the complainant, as such the said amount was also deducted as extra charges in the complainant’s credit card account in the month of September 2005. As on 11.09.2005 the complainant was due to the bank a sum of Rs.5935.63, as per the statement of account for the month of September 2005. After that the complainant had not paid any amount towards the credit card account as per the terms and conditions the other dues for the said amount in the said account like service charge and interest were accrued and as on 08.05.2007 is due to the bank a sum of Rs.9719.48 the said amount was deducted from the salary’s saving account on the basis of the right available under the lien banking rules, as such the opposite parties had contented that the said act of debiting the amount is not a deficiency of service and complaint is to be liable to be dismissed.
10. However considering the both sides contentions and material on records available before this forum the contention of the opposite parties that the original silver credit card account availed by complainant and maintained with 1st opposite party bank was subsequently converted into Gold Credit card account is acceptable. Further the amount due in the said previous credit card account was carried out to the Gold credit card accounts of the complainant. A sum of Rs.9417/- was said to have been paid by the complainant is not considered to be the payment made for the discharge of evidence as fore closure of the account, but it has been paid as a part payment for due in the said account only, as contented by the opposite parties. The same is proved by the statement of account filed by the opposite parties for the month of July 2005 in
Ex.B2. Contrary to this no proof of statement of account filed by the complainant to prove that the said amount was paid as payment for total due and for fore closure of account. Further as on statement of account for the month of July 2005 after giving credit to the payment made by the complainant the balance to be paid is Rs.7665.30. Subsequent to this, since the complainant has not paid any amount and for the said due for the subsequent months necessary service charge and interest are to be paid by the complainant for the said amount accordingly they were accrued and due by the complainant under the said account. Further as per the ombudsman proceeding the late fee charges were ordered to be deducted and accordingly on the consent of the 1st opposite party bank to review the balance of account was ordered. Accordingly the opposite party have also deducted a sum of Rs.2600/- and revised the said account of the complainant in the month of September 2005 which reveals in the statement of September 2005 in Ex.B2. After deducting the amount as on the said date the complainant is due a sum of Rs.5,935.63, is also mentioned in the statement of accounts. In this juncture, it is pertinent to mention that after the month of September 2005 no transactions in the said credit card account was made by the complainant, and also the complainant has maintained during that period a savings account with the 1st opposite party bank, therefore if the opposite parties would have been taken proper steps to collect the due amount from the complainant under the right of lien which has said to have been invoked in the month of September 2008, would have been invoked in the month September 2005 itself. There is no valid reason and explanation of the side of opposite parties for not taking such necessary steps. Further having kept account pending without any necessary steps taken by the opposite parties to recover from the complainant, but simply adding accrued interest and service charges with the said due and suddenly deducting a sum of Rs.9790/- in the month of November 2008 from the savings bank account of the complainant appears to be not proper. Since the said amount is due and unpaid by the complainant from September 2005, the opposite parties bank can impose subsequent interest for the said amount at the rate of 12% from the date of September 2005 to till the date of recovery made i.e. November 2008. If calculated in such a way the principle due is Rs.5935/- and the interest from September 2005 to November 2008 @ 12% will be a sum a Rs.1810/- Therefore the total amount due under the said account by the complainant to the opposite parties bank would be Rs.7745/- as on November 2008 will be proper and reasonable. Contrary to this recovery or the amount debited a sum of Rs,9417/- by the opposite parties would be improper and unreasonable which amounts to deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.
11. Therefore we are of the considered view, as discussed above the opposite parties have deducted a sum of Rs.9417/- from the savings account instead of the actual amount due as calculated above a sum of Rs.7745/-, as such a balance amount of Rs.1672/- the opposite parties bank is liable to refund to the complainant as excess and unreasonable amount recovered or debited from the savings bank account. The Opposite parties are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as just and reasonable compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards litigation charges to the complainant. Accordingly the said points 1 and 2 are answered.
In the result, the complaint is partly allowed. The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.1672/ (Rupees One thousand six hundred and seventy two only) as refund and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as cost to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the above amounts (Rs.1672/- + Rs.10,000/) will carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this order to till the date of payment.
Dictated to the Assistant transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the 17th day of February 2016.
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
Complainant’s side documents:
Ex.A1- 30.5.2005 - Copy of letter from the complainant to the Reserve Bank of
India, Ombudsman Department, Kolkata 700 001.
Ex.A2- 16.6.2005 - Copy of Letter from the 1st opposite party to the
complainant.
Ex.A3- 28.6.2005 - Copy of receipt issued by the opposite party bank.
Ex.A4- 5.7.2005 - Copy of letter from the complainant to the Reserve Bank of
India, Ombudsman Dept., Kolkata 700 001.
Ex.A5- 23.9.2005 - Copy of letter from the complainant to the Reserve Bank of
India, Ombudsman Department.
Ex.A6 – 17.2.2006 - Copy of legal notice.
Ex.A7- 7.3.2006 - Copy of reply from the complainant to the opposite
parties counsel.
Ex.A8- 22.11.2008 - Copy of letter from the opposite parties bank to the
complainant.
Ex.A9- 29.11.2008 - Copy of Bank Statement of the complainant.
Ex.A10- 7.12.2010 - Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant to the
Opposite parties.
Ex.A11- 23.12.2010- Copy of proof of delivery of notice to the 1st opposite party.
Ex.A12- 9.12.2010 - Copy of Ack. Card of the 2nd opposite party.
Ex.A13- 24.6.2004 - Copy of loan sanction letter by the opposite parties with
Authorization schedule.
Opposite parties’ Exhibits:-
Ex.B1- - - Copy of Power of attorney.
Ex.B2- - - Copy of statement of accounts.
MEMBER-II PRESIDENT.
