Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/295/2007

Syed Abhuthahir - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

D.Arun Kumar.

20 Dec 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   04.05.2007

                                                                        Date of Order :   20.12.2017

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.295/2007

WEDNESDAY THIS  20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017

 

Syed Abuthahir,

No.38, Angappa Naicken  Street,

Parrys, Chennai 600 001.                                             Complainant

 

                                        ..Vs..

 

1.  M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd.,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

46, Gandhi Mandapam Road,

Kotturpuram Branch,

Chennai 600 085.

 

2. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd.,

Rep. by its Manager, (legal),

Head office,

Race Course circle,

Vadodera 390 007.                                   Opposite parties.

 

Counsel for Complainant           :   M/s. D. Arun Kumar & another           

Counsel for opposite parties      :   M/s. Dev, Sai & Shaffiq Associates

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

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

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

         The complainant submit that  he is a business men availed credit card No.4477470115875008 in the year 2002 of the 1^st opposite party.    The complainant was prompt and punctual in repayment.  The complainant used the credit card  for fueling his  tourist bus regularly.   In the month of July 2005 a dispute arose between the 1^st opposite party and the complainant  in respect of a transaction dated 20.6.2005 for a sum of Rs.20,735/- towards fueling the tourist bus.    The complainant state that on 20.6.2005 there was a bandh no vehicle operated,  the complainant’s  tourist bus also not played; there was no transaction on that day.   Hence the complainant contacted the customer care centre of the 1^st opposite party and made a  complaint with regard to the said transaction dated 20.6.2005 and requested the charge slip of the transaction.   But till date the 1^st opposite party has not produced the charge slip.  On the other hand the 1^st opposite party assured the complainant for due investigation and promised to reverse the same  transaction.   Further the complainant contended that  in the month of August 2005 the very same transaction was carried out  in the statement of account  including actual previous month huge amount of Rs.7412/- along with penal charges and interest.   When the complainant contacted the 1^st opposite party with the  customer care officer  the complainant was advised to pay his current month charges alone leaving the disputed amount.  Similarly in the month of October 2005  the complainant received the statement of account with penal charges without reversing the disputed bill amount of Rs.20,735/- dated 20.6.2005.  On questioning the same the opposite parties advised the complainant to pay his minimum dues of Rs.13,780/-.  Thereafter during the month of November and December 2005 also the opposite party has not reversed the disputed amount of Rs.20,735/-  and in the month of January 2006 the 1^st opposite party sent the collection agent optims for recovery of the balance amount including the disputed amount and the credit card has been deactivated by the 1^st opposite party.   Hence the complainant made the official optims and was informed that a sum of  Rs.4,000/- converted into an EMI from December 2005 in spite of specific instruction from the complainant and directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- immediately.    In the month of February 2006 also the complainant was instructed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- as interim payment against the charge slip of the disputed transaction.     Subsequently the complainant was instructed to pay a sum of  Rs.32,200/- and was paid on 18.4.2006.  Further the complainant state that to his shock he found the statement for the subsequent month of May 2006 without any reversal of the disputed amount of Rs.20,735/- dated 20.6.2005, interest and penal charges claiming huge amount of Rs.234834.50.   The opposite party also issued a notice dated 22.8.2006 demanding the imaginary amount of Rs.2,34,834.50 towards the dues to the complainant.   The complainant issued a reply to the 1^st opposite party through his counsel on 5.9.2006.    Further the false entry of Rs.20,735/- regarding the transaction has not been reversed till date and launching of claiming service charges exorbitant rate of interest,  penal interest sending collection agents, clubbing the amounts and making it as EMI, compelling to pay the amount to the complainant.   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 filed.

2.    The brief averments in the Written Version filed by the opposite parties is  as follows:

      The opposite parties deny each and every allegations except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite parties also state that  the complainant had approached the opposite party bank on 5.7.2002 for a credit card and the same was issued vide credit card No.4477 4701 1587 5008 after due verification of documents.  The complainant had executed an agreement and other related documents in accordance with the rules and regulations of the bank.  The opposite parties further state that the complainant after availing the credit card used the same for purchases / cash withdrawals  etc.  Since the complainant failed and neglected to pay the amount within the due date, he is liable to pay interest and penalty which are contractual and binding, but it shall not be against the R.B.I. Guidelines and rules.   Further the opposite parties also state that  the complainant had sent a notice to the first opposite party stating the dispute arose due to the transaction of Rs.20,735/- on 20.6.2005 for which the 1^st opposite party sent a detailed reply notice dated 28.11.2006.   If at all the complainant could have stopped that particular payment of Rs.20,735/- alone and should not evade payment of the entire outstanding dues of Rs.2,72,514/-.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties 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.A11 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite parties filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B4 marked on the side of the  opposite parties.

4.   The points for the consideration is: 

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

5. ON POINT:

          The complainant  has not turned up to advance any oral arguments, after filing written arguments.   Heard the opposite parties counsel.   Perused the records namely complaint, proof affidavit and documents.   The complainant pleaded  in complaint and contended that he is a business men availed credit card No.4477470115875008 in the year 2002 of the 1^st opposite party.    The complainant was prompt and punctual in repayment.  The complainant used to pay all his dues in one shot payment also established from the transactions and the statement of the opposite parties.  The complainant used the credit card  for fueling his  tourist bus regularly.   In the month of July 2005 a dispute arose between the 1^st opposite party and the complainant  in respect of a transaction dated 20.6.2005 for a sum of Rs.20,735/- towards fueling the tourist bus.    The contention of the complainant is that on 20.6.2005 there was a bandh no vehicle operated,  the complainant’s  tourist bus also not played; there was no transaction on that day.   Hence the complainant contacted the customer care centre of the 1^st opposite party and made a complaint with regard to the said transaction dated 20.6.2005 and requested the charge slip of the transaction.   But till date the 1^st opposite party has not produced the charge slip even in this forum to prove the alleged transaction dated 20.6.2005 is in correct.   On the other hand the 1^st opposite party assured the complainant for due investigation and promised to reverse the same  the transaction but he has not submitted any report or record to show such investigation and reverse the transaction.  Further the complainant contended that  in the month of August 2005 the very same transaction was carried out  in the statement of account  including actual previous month huge amount of Rs.7412/- along with penal charges and interest.   When the complainant contacted the 1^st opposite party with the   customer care officer  the complainant was advised to pay his current month charges alone leaving the disputed amount.  But there is no record. On the other hand the opposite party admitted in his written version that “the complainant  could have stopped that particular payment of Rs.20,735/- alone and should not evade payment of the entire outstanding dues of Rs.2,72,514/-.”   Similarly in the month of October 2005  the complainant received the statement of account with penal charges without reversing the disputed bill amount of Rs.20,735/- dated 20.6.2005.  On questioning the same the opposite parties advised the complainant to pay his minimum dues of Rs.13,780/-.  Thereafter during the month of November and December 2005 also the opposite party has not reversed the disputed amount of Rs.20,735/-  and in the month of January 2006 the 1^st opposite party sent the collection agent optims for recovery of the balance amount including the disputed amount and the credit card has been deactivated by the 1^st opposite party.   Hence the complainant made the official optims and was informed that a sum of  Rs.4,000/- converted into an EMI from December 2005 in spite of specific instruction from the complainant and directed to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- immediately.    In the month of February 2006 also the complainant was instructed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- as interim payment against the charge slip of the disputed transaction.      Subsequently the complainant was instructed to pay a sum of  Rs.32,200/- and was paid on 18.4.2006.  Further the complainant contended that to his shock and disbelief  he found the statement for the subsequent month of May 2006 without any reversal of the disputed amount of Rs.20,735/- dated 20.6.2005, interest and penal charges claiming huge amount of Rs.234834.50.   The opposite party also issued a notice dated 22.8.2006 demanding the imaginary amount of Rs.2,34,834.50 towards the dues to the complainant as per Ex.A6 for which the complainant has sent suitable reply dated 5.9.2006.  

6.     Further the false entry of Rs.20,735/- regarding the transaction has not been reversed till date and launching wild allegation of claiming service charges exorbitant rate of interest,  penal interest sending collection agents, clubbing the amounts and making it as EMI, compelling to pay the amount arbitrarily and deactivate the credit card etc. amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. 

7.     The contention of the opposite parties is that the complainant had approached the opposite party bank on 5.7.2002 for a credit card and the same was issued vide credit card No.4477 4701 1587 5008 after due verification of documents.  The complainant had executed an agreement and other related documents in accordance with the rules and regulations of the bank.  But none of the document produced before this forum.  The complainant after availing the credit card used the same for purchases / cash withdrawals  etc.  Since the complainant failed and neglected to pay the amount within the due date, he is liable to pay interest and penality which are contractual and binding, but it shall not be against the R.B.I. Guidelines and rules.   Further the contention of the opposite parties is that the complainant  had kept huge outstanding and the complainant  have not made any effort to repay the said outstanding.  Hence the opposite parties issued a demand notice dated 22.8.2006 to pay the net outstanding amount of Rs.2,34,834/- as per Ex.B2.   But in this case the cause of action arose only on the basis of the transaction dated 20.6.2005 for a sum of  Rs.20,735/- towards fuel of the complaint tourist bus.  The opposite parties even after accepting for  reversal of the amount,  investigation and has not issued the reversal of the amount charge slip on the other hand raising such volumes of contention is not acceptable.   The opposite parties can very well claim his all the dues in appropriate manner not in this case since this case is filed on the cause of action dated 20.6.2005 for Rs.20,735/- and the deficiency in service of the opposite party.   Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay or reverse the debit entry of Rs.20,735/- and not to collect exorbitant  interest and penal charges beyond the scope of Reserve Bank of India Guidelines and Rules with compensation of Rs.10,000/- for mental agony and cost of  Rs.5,000/-  and the point is answered accordingly.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part.  The  opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay or reverse the debit entry of Rs.20,735/- (Rupees Twenty thousand seven hundred and thirty five only) and not to collect exorbitant interest and penal charges beyond the scope of Reserve Bank of India Guidelines and Rules and shall pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) towards mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/-  (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.   

The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.

            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 20^th day  of  December  2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1- 3.1.2005    - Copy of receipt.

Ex.A2- 16.2.2006  - Copy of receipt.

Ex.A3- 18.4.2006  - Copy of receipt.

Ex.A4- 10.8.2006  - Copy of letter issued by complainant.

Ex.A5-                - Copy of fax receipt.

Ex.A6- 22.8.2006  - Copy of notice issued by the 1^st opposite party.

Ex.A7- 2.9.2006    - Copy of reply notice.

Ex.A8-                - Copy of Ack. Card.

Ex.A9- 25.9.2006  - Copy of notice issued by the complainant.

Ex.A10-28.11.2006 – Copy of notice issued by 1^st opp. party.

Ex.A11-9.2.2007   - Copy of notice issued by complainant.

Opposite parties’ side document:   

Ex.B1- 22.8.2006  - Copy of legal  notice.

Ex.B2- 28.11.2006         - Copy of  legal notice.

Ex.B3- 10.2.2007  - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.B4-                - Copy of statement details.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.