CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – X
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. OF DELHI
Udyog Sadan, C – 22 & 23, Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel)
New Delhi – 110 016
Case No.60/2009
MD. HAIDER IMAM
S/O MD. HASAN TAUHEED
R/O H.NO.110, STREET NO.9,
GROUND FLOOR, ZAKIR NAGAR,
OKHLA, NEW DELHI-110025
…………. COMPLAINANT
VS.
- M/S ICICI BANK LTD.
THROUGH AUTHORIZE/COMPETENT OFFICIAL,
REGD. OFFICE AT –
“LANDMARK”,
RACE COURSE CIRCLE,
VADODRA-390 007
- ICICI BANK LTD. – CREDIT CARD DIVISION’
THROUGH AUTHORIZE/COMPETENT OFFICIAL,
EMPIRE COMPLEX,
414, S.B. MARG, LOWER PAREL,
MUMBAI-400 013
- ICICI BANK LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE AT –
D-949, NEW FRIENDS COLONY,
NEW DELHI
…………..RESPONDENTS
Date of Order: 20.10.2015
O R D E R
A.S. Yadav – President
The case of the complainant is that he was having one credit card bearing no. 5176533811684007 from OP-2. Complainant is also having its Saving A/c No.004601054337 with OP-3. OP-2 in the month of March 2008 issued Credit Card bearing No.4076513105187002 in the name of complainant and dispatched the same at the residence of complainant alongwith letter dated 24.3.2008.
Complainant was already having one credit card from OP-2 itself hence the other card was useless for complainant. Complainant was about to return the additional credit card to OP-2 as it was of no use of him and for the time being the complainant kept the second credit card with him in safe custody.
Complainant received one SMS from OP-2 on 29.3.2008 that an amount of Rs.13,000/- has been utilized form the second credit card issued to complainant by OP-2. Complainant was shocked to read the contents of the SMS as complainant has not utilized the said credit card and the same was lying with him his safe custody. Complainant made a call to the Customer Care Service of OP Bank to inquire about the said SMS but the Executive of the Customer Care Service was unable to process the query of the complainant as the server was down on the particular day. On the very next day i.e. 30.3.2008 complainant tried to contact the Customer Care Centre of OP Bank but again he faced the similar problem i.e. the server was down on that day also.
Complainant on 31.3.208 called OP at their branch phone number where Ms Poonam, the Executive of OP Bank attended the complaint and assured complainant that the matter would be resolved at the earliest and complainant was also given one service request No.SR/61221910. On 01.4.2008 complainant made a written complaint to OP and faxed the same to OP. In the said complaint complainant had categorically stated that his credit card was used by some person and asked the OP to probe into the matter.
Complainant vide letter dated 27.5.2008 informed OP-2 that he is not satisfied with the investigation of OP and that the said transaction was not made by him and also the name and mobile number on the alleged invoice does not belong to him. Further the signature on the said receipt was also not of the complainant. Complainant asked OP to get the matter probed through police so that the truth can be ascertained.
It is further stated that the credit card in question was never used by the complainant and not even a single transaction was made through the said credit card. Complaint has not even put his signatures at the back of the said credit card as the said credit card is in the safe custody of complainant As OP were continuously issuing credit card statement reflecting the disputed transaction and letter demanding the dues, complainant was compelled to issue a legal notice dated 10.11.2008 to OP asking them to investigate the matter properly and not to harass the complaint by issuing frivolous demand letters.
OP sent their agent on 16.7.2008 and 08.9.2008 to collect Rs.240/- and Rs.710/- respectively in the pretext of payment of process fee against the deletion of the disputed transaction. The agent on 08.9.2008 even broke down the credit card no.5176533811684007 in the pretext that the said amount paid is final with respect o the credit card and complaint will not get any further statement from the OP regarding the credit card payment.
Complainant was shocked to receive letter dated 31.10.20087 of OP that an outstanding to the tune of Rs.18737.56 in respect of ICICI Bank Credit Card A/c No.5176533811684007 is due as on 31.10.2008 however the said communication was received by complaint on 08.11.2008. Complainant sent a legal notice dated 10.11.2008 to OP to withdraw its communication dated 31.10.2008.
OP despite legal notice dated 10.11.2008 did not withdraw their communication dated 31.10.2008 and instead debited the saving account of the complaint with Rs.18,737.56 on 14.11.2008 without the consent of the complainant.
It is prayed that OP be directed to withdraw their letter dated 31.10.2008 and refund Rs.18,737.56 which was debited from the saving account of the complainant on 14.11.2008 with interest @ 24% p.a. and also to pay Rs.1 lakh for compensation and Rs.10,000/- for litigation charges.
OP in his reply took the plea that complainant disputed the transaction of Rs.13,000/- from his second credit card vie credit card No.4076513105187002. On the request of complainant, OP bank conducted an investigation and found that the transaction was done from the credit card only against the shopping at “Rajdhani Electricals” at New Delhi and accordingly sent a letter to complainant about the investigation and its finding.
It is further submitted that onus to show that a transaction is fraudulent was upon complainant as per clause XVIII of the terms and conditions governing credit card facilities.
It is submitted that charge slip was duly received by OP bank showing that the card was physically present at the time of transaction. It is submitted that complaint also did not file any report with the local police station as per clause X of the “Terms and conditions governing usage of Credit Cards”.
We have heard Ld. Counsel for parties and carefully perused the record as well as WS of the parties.
Ld. Counsel for OP has stated that as per clause 18 onus was on the complainant to prove that the transaction was fraudulent. It is significant to note that complainant has discharged the onus the same back. By categorically stating that he has never conducted the transaction and the name and mobile number on the alleged invoice does not belong to him and the further signature are not of the complainant. Complainant denied letter dated 27.5.08. Complainant asked OP to probe the matter through police so that the truth can be ascertained. Admittedly even after service of the letter 27.5.2008 OP has neither referred the matter to police however the complainant to participate in the investigation. It is admitted fact that the complaint was not in the investigation. It is significant to note that in the receipt name of the complaint is not properly mentioned also the same is not bearing his mobile number. Complaint has denied the signature n the receipt. Complainant has denied the signature on the receipt onus was on the OP to prove whether the receipt is bearing signature of complainant.
Counsel for complaint has referred to case of P.R. Krishnamoorthy Vs SBI Cards and Payment Services (P) Ltd. & Anr. III (2011) CPJ 12 where facts of the are identical that OP has provided SBI card to complainant and in that case complainant received monthly statement in which he was asked to pay sum of Rs.4725/- for stay in 2nd OIP hotel on. The complainant immediately informed OP that he has not availed the service of OP-2 and requested to reverse the entry. The 1st OP replied on 20.7.2004 stating that the matter was under consideration. On 20.8.06 OP-1 stated that they have received the charge slip from OP-2 and requested him to confirm the genuineness for which he has given a detailed reply and categorically denying the staying in the hotel and he has not signed any signature on the credit card charge slip. It was also admitted by the 2nd OP in the letter dated 11.8.2004. It was held by Hon’ble State Commission that in this case complainant was explained the circumstances in which credit card was handed but has hot signed the credit card but as not signed the credit card voucher which was having found no signature of the customer and specially for each and every payment specimen signature of the customer to be verified with bank for passing any payment which was not done by OP-1 in this case. Accordingly OP was directed to refund the amount and also Rs.10,000/- for compensation alongwith certain costs.
In this case complainant has categorically stated that he has never used the card and not even a single transaction was made through the said credit card. It was for the OP to get signature of the complainant verified from the bank records. It was for the OP to prove that the receipt was having signature of the complainant. Complainant has categorically told OP to get the matter investigated by the police but the OP instead of doing so deducted the amount from the account of the complainant. Complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of OP.
OP is directed to refund a sum of Rs.18,737/- alongwith interest @ 10% p.a. from 15.11.2008. OP is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.3,000/- towards litigation expenses.
Let the order be complied within one month of the receipt thereof. The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of order be sent to the parties, free of cost, and thereafter file be consigned to record room.
(D.R. TAMTA) (A.S. YADAV)
MEMBER PRESIDENT
