Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

275/2010

S.Ebinson - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Bank Ltd & others - Opp.Party(s)

M/s.G.Sam

28 Oct 2015

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   23.06. 2010

                                                                        Date of Order :   28.10.2015.

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI(SOUTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM M.A.M.L.,                       : PRESIDENT

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

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

 

                                         C.C.NO.275/2010

WEDNESDAY THIS 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015

 

S. Ebinson,

165, Anna Street,

TV Nagar,

Thirumangalam,

Anna Nagar,

Chennai 600 040.                                                   ..Complainant

                                                 ..Vs..

 

1. ICICI Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Regional Manager,

Regional Processing Centre,

6^th Floor, Sakthi Towers,

No.766, Anna Salai,

Chennai 600 002.

 

2. ICICI Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Branch Manager,

Chennai Main Branch,

P.B.O. 1610, Dore House Annexe,

No.44, Moore Street,

Chennai 600 001.

 

3. ICICI Bank Limited,

Rep. by its Manager,

1^st Cenotaph Road Branch,

Chennai 600 018.                                            .. Opposite parties.

 

 

 For the Complainant            :  M/s. G. Sam Edwin Raj  & another  

 

For the  opposite parties       :  M/s. S. Namasivayam & other.

 

        This complaint is being filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the C.P. Act 1986 to refund the amount of Rs.6520/- which was illegally taken from his savings bank account with interest at the rate of 36% p.a.  and also to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and also to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards conveyances and also to pay a sum  of Rs.5000/- towards the cost of the complaint to the complainant. 

ORDER

 

THIRU. B. RAMALINGAM PRESIDENT

         

1.The case of the complainant is briefly as follows:-

        The opposite party had approached the complainant to have a credit card from ICICI bank during the month of  November 2002.   The said card credit is valid from December 2002 to December 2008 and identified by the number 4477 4635 6284 2001.  During the time the complainant was residing at No.1 Gandhi Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai.  Since then the complainant is using the credit card with proper care and prompt in paying all the bills in appropriate time.  It is important to note that so far, the complainant  has never paid any late fee or any other penal charges, appreciating the same many banks have approached the complainant with very good offers for the credibility that the complainant is maintaining with the opposite parties.   He went to Bangalore on his job during October 2006 while that time the complainant received a call saying that the call is from ICICI bank and person requested that whether the complainant is interested in a balance transfer.    This call had come from Kolkatta as the number started with +9133.  The complainant very deliberately rejected that the complainant does not want any such balance transfer or like any other loan from their bank.   Even though the complainant rejected the balance transfer,  the complainant received the cheque from their bank on 16^th January 2007 for Rs.20,000/- in the name of Standard Chartered Bank, which is not related to the complainant.    Immediately the complainant contacted the ICICI call centre and requested to cancel the balance transfer for Rs.20,000/- which was sent through Cheque.   The complainant also informed that he received a call from ICICI bank and informed that he does not want the balance transfer and despite the balance transfer was sent to him.  The complainant has also informed the ICICI bank call centre that the card number in which the cheque had come is not the complainant’s one and registered a request to cancel the balance transfer.  The complainant had cancelled the cheque and dropped it in ICICI bank, Koramangala Branch.  After a week time to the shock and surprise of the complainant had found that the balance transfer was not cancelled while checking credit card account on his internet.    The complainant had registered for cancellation of balance transfer for seven times, which was confirmed by the call centre executive.  The opposite parties never cared to the complainant and gave evasive replies. 

2.     On 28.4.2007  two persons came to the complainant’s house introducing themselves as the opposite parties collection officers and demanded to pay the amount by the opposite parties and further by abusing filthy language threatened the complainant to face serious consequences if he fails to pay the amount.    Due to the above said illegal threat the complainant suffered severe mental agony.   Again on  20^th June 2007 he received a call from Ms.Sunitha of ICICI bank stating that this balance transfer amount is transferred to the Standard Chartered bank credit card account 4763 3820 1131 7402.   She also asked the complainant to check with Standard Chartered Bank whether this account belongs to the complainant and if any amount is transferred in his name.    The complainant called Standard Chartered Bank credit card and checked if this card number belonged to some one of the complainant’s name.    To the complainant’s surprise  the Standard Chartered bank credit card division informed that this credit card number does not belong to Standard Chartered Bank.   On 2^nd July 2007 the complainant noticed that ICICI bank saving account 00101058056 was blocked.  This account is linked to ICICI credit card 4477 4635 6284 2001.  The last transaction that had happened before this date was an Electronic Clearing System (ECS) to Standard Chartered Bank personal loan for Rs.2408/- on 11^th June 2007.   The next ECS was supposed to happen on 25^th June 2007.  This was denied as the account was blocked.  Due to this the complainant suffered a lot.    The complainant again noticed on 4^th December 2007 that his ICICI bank savings account 000101058056 was blocked again.  He immediately sent a mail to ICICI bank customer care requesting them to solve the issue and unblock his account.   He only got a reply insisting him to pay the balance and settle the issue.  On 3^rd February 2008 he noticed that an amount of Rs.6520/- lying in his saving account is stolen by the opposite parties from ICICI Savings account 000101058056.   The above said act of the theft was committed by the opposite parties on 31^st January 2008.   Accordingly the complainant issued a legal notice to the opposite parties on 13.2.2008.  However the opposite parties inspite of receiving the  same did not respond.  As such the act of the opposite parties are amounts to deficiency of service and which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.   Hence the complaint. 

3.  Written version of   opposite parties are   as follows:-

The complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable in law and on the facts of the case.   The opposite party does not admit any of the allegations contained in the complaint except those that are expressly admitted herein.     ICICI bank Limited is a banking company with enormous reputation.  It is India’s second largest bank.  It provides loan for different purposes and credit cards for interested persons, its policy of lending, prescription of interest, penal interest, surcharge and all other charges are determined on the basis of the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India.  All its transactions are transport and are submitted to scrutiny by anyone including the complainant.    It has formatted a code of business conduct and ethics for its directors and employees and the same is scrupulously followed by all the employees and officers.   The opposite party had approached the complainant to have a credit card from ICICI bank are denied as false and the complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  On the other hand it was the complainant  who was keen to avail the credit card facilities.  The allegations that he was prompt in paying all the bills at appropriate time are also denied and the complainant is put to strict proof of the same.   Further allegations that on 28.4.2007 two persons came to the complainant’s house introducing themselves as the opposite parties collection officers and to pay the amount demanded by the opposite parties and further by abusing filthy language threatened the complainant to face serious consequences if he fails to pay the amount are denied as not only false but also highly defamatory.  In this connection the opposite parties crave leave of this forum to initiate appropriate proceedings against the complainant for defamation.     Therefore the opposite parties pray this forum to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.

4.     Complainant has filed his Proof affidavit and  Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 were marked on the side of the complainant.   Opposite parties have  filed his proof affidavit and  no document was  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 ?

 

2. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?

 

                            

6.      POINTS 1 & 2 :

         Perused the complaint  filed by the complainant, written version filed by the  opposite parties, proof affidavit filed by the complainant and the  opposite parties and  Ex.A1 to Ex.A11  filed on the side of the complainant and considered both side arguments.

7.     The main grievance raised by the complainant in the complaint is that without his consent and despite of his refusal,  the opposite parties’ bank have raised balance transfer draft for Rs.20,000/- in his credit card account and also withdrawn a sum of Rs.6520/- from his savings account and also sent the collecting agent to his house  and harassed him without any reason, as such the opposite parties have committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice which caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant.   As such the complainant has filed this compliant for refund of the above said withdrawn amount of Rs.6520/- from his savings account with interest and compensation of RS.10,00,000/- and litigation charges to the complainant.

8.     Whereas the opposite parties have resisted the said complaint stating that the complainant is not a consumer by holding account of credit facilities and savings account on the basis of terms and conditions under the banking rules.  Further denied of other allegations made by the complainant in respect of transfer of balance transaction draft amount of Rs.20,000/- and also stated that the alleged amount withdrawal of Rs.6520/- from complainant’s savings account for the balance due in the credit card account of the complainant were by adopting particulars of lien available for the opposite parties under bank rules and also denied the allegations that they have sent collection agent to the complainant and harrassed him, on unreasonable basis.   As such the compliant is to be dismissed without cost.

9.     The objection raised by the opposite parties that the complainant is not a consumer having holding accounts of credit card account and savings account with the opposite parties’ bank on the basis of terms and conditions of the banking rules is not acceptable because we are of the considered view that the opposite parties by providing credit card account and savings bank account to the complainant as their customer which is not without consideration.  The opposite parties are charging interest as well as other charges in providing the said facility of holding account in their bank to the complainant, such service is on consideration as such the complainant is to be considered to be a consumer and complaint filed alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice as against the opposite parties as mentioned in the complaint, the complaint filed by the complainant is maintainable as per Consumer Protection  Act 1986.   

10.    Further the complainant has raised grievance in the complaint stating that without his consent and despite of his refusal the opposite parties’ bank has granted him a balance transfer draft amount of Rs.20,000/- for which he had received cheque for the same on 16^th January 2007 in the name of Standard Chartered Bank which is not related to him.      Further submitted that the complainant immediately has contacted the ICICI  Call Centre and requested to transfer the balance transfer for Rs.20,000/- which was sent through cheque and expressing that he is not willing to avail such amount, he had cancelled the cheque dropped it in ICICI Bank Koramangala Branch.   Despite of such action taken by the complainant after a week of time to his surprise the complainant had found that the balance transfer was not cancelled.  Despite of several attempt made for cancellation of the said amount and made registered to the opposite parties, the opposite parties have not taken any steps and the exchange of communications made between the complainant and the opposite parties.  The complainant came to know that the said amount was transferred to Standard Chartered bank in the debit  card account No.4763 3820 1131 7402 which is not belongs to the complainant, which is due to the gross negligence and improper act of the opposite parties bank, in order to prove the said negligent act of the opposite parties the complainant has filed document Ex.A1 which is the letter dated 25.7.2007 sent by the Standard Chartered Bank to the complainant on his request.  Ex.A2 the legal notice, dated 13.2.2008 issued by the complainant  and Ex.A3 Postal Acknowledgement as a proof for receipt of the said notice by the opposite parties, Ex.A4 to Ex.A6 the communications sent by the Senior Manager of the opposite parties bank dated 7.10.2009, 11.9.2009 and 6.4.2010  to the complainant.  The said communications sent by the Senior Manager of the opposite parties bank to the complainant i.e. Ex.A4 to ex.A6 prove that the said alleged amount of Rs.20,000/- was transmitted by the opposite parties bank as amount from the complainant credit card account to Standard Chartered bank in the debit card account No. 4763 3820 1131 7402 which is not belongs to the complainant and the said amount was said to have been withdrawn / encashed by Mr. Namesh Muljabhai Parekh  and also proves that despite of the request made by the opposite parties’ bank for reversal of the amount since it was belated and amount was already encashed by the  3^rd party, the reversal was not done as requested by the opposite parties bank.  Therefore as per the averments made by the complainant as well as the above said document filed on the side of the complainant it proves that the opposite parties’ bank on their gross negligence and mistake the amount of Rs.20,000/- by balance transfer draft sent to the Standard Chartered bank in the 3^rd party debit card account and without any valid reason, despite of the complainant several attempts the opposite parties bank has made credit for the said amount in the credit card account of the complainant and have not taken any steps to rectify the same.   Further without rectifing the said defects the opposite parties have also made attempt to collect the said amount from the complainant, as such they have withdrawn a sum of Rs.6520/- from the complainant’s savings bank account and which is not valid and sustainable.  Apart from this the opposite parties have made attempt to collect the said amount against the opposite parties by sending collecting agent to his house and made harassment of the complainant are all acceptable and proved on the side of complainant in this proceeding.    On the contrary to the above fact despite of detail allegation made by the complainant with regard to the above said fact in the complaint and also filed necessary document referred above along with complaint which were also furnished to the opposite parties, the opposite parties have not raised any specific denial or explanation for the said allegation made by the complainant in their written version as well as in their proof affidavit, but having evasively made simple denial about the said allegation made against them by the complainant in the complaint.  The opposite parties have not denied the above said document said to have been sent by the Senior Manager of the opposite party to the complainant which are filed as Ex.A4 to Ex.A6 in this proceedings. 

11.    Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the allegation made  by the complainant that the opposite parties have made attempt to collect the said amount of Rs.20,000/- as “balance transfer draft” amount  from the complainant, have sent collected agents to his house had made harassment is also acceptable.   Further as contended by the complainant the amount of Rs.6520/- which was withdrawn by the bank from his savings account on 3.2.2008 towards the said alleged  Balance transfer amount is also not valid and despite of request made by the complainant, the opposite parties’ bank have not come forward to realize their mistake and not corrected the said bank account are also amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice against the complainant.   Contrary to this the opposite parties by their Senior Manager as per Ex.A4 to Ex.A6 having admitted that the amount of Rs.20,000/- under the balance transfer was mistakenly and negligently sent to unknown account number debiting card of 3^rd party to the Standard Chartered Bank which is not belongs to the complainant and claiming that they have right to withdraw the said sum of Rs.6520/- from the savings account of the complainant towards the said amount of Rs.20,000/-  under the right to lien is not acceptable and valid and not sustainable. 

12.            Therefore as discussed above we are of the considered view that the opposite parties’ bank have committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice as alleged by the complainant that without his consent and despite of his refusal the opposite parties’ bank has transferred a sum of Rs.20,000/- under the balance transfer mistakenly to the 3^rd party account to the Standard Chartered Bank and despite of the fact brought to the  knowledge  of  the  opposite  parties’  bank  instead of rectifying the said defect they have attempted to collect the said amount from the complainant, as the said amount is due by the complainant and also withdrawn a sum of Rs.6520/- from the complainant savings account.  Therefore  according to our view the opposite parties by their above said act have also caused mental agony and hardship to the complainant, as such the opposite parties are liable to do proper rectification of account in the complaint mentioned credit card account and since the account of the complainant should not to claim a miss-sent balance transfer amount of Rs.20,000/- from the complainant.   Therefore we are of the considered view that the opposite parties are jointly and severally directed not to claim a balance transfer amount of Rs.20,000/- from the credit card account of the complainant and to return or to re-credit a sum of Rs.6520/- with interest at the rate of 8% from 3.2.2008 to till the date of re-crediting the same in the savings account of the complainant  and  also to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as just and reasonable compensation and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- as litigation charges to the complainant and as such the points 1 & 2 are answered in favour of the complainant. 

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed.  The opposite parties are jointly and severally  directed to return or to re-credit a sum of Rs.6,520/- (Rupees Six thousand five hundred and twenty only) with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from 3.2.2008 to till the date of re-credit the same in the savings account of the complainant and also  to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) as compensation  and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees Five thousand only)  towards litigation charges to the complainant within six weeks from the date of this order failing which the compensation amount of (Rs.50,000/-) will also carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order  passed till the date of realization.

Dictated to the steno-typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this the 28^th    day of October   2015.

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents :

Ex.A1- 25.7.2007 - Copy of reply letter of Standard Chartered bank.

Ex.A2- 13.2.2008 - Copy of legal notice.

Ex.A3        -       -      - Copy of Ack. Card.

Ex.A4- 10.8.2009 - Copy of reply from opposite parties.

Ex.A5- 11.9.2009 - Copy of reply from opposite parties.

Ex.A6- 6.4.2010  - Copy of reply from opposite parties.

Ex.A7- 14.12.2011- Copy of Statement of account.

Ex.A8- 14.1.2012 - Copy of Statement of account.

Ex.A9- 14.2.2012 - Copy of Statement of account.

Ex.A10- 14.3.2012- Copy of Statement of account.

Ex.A11- 14.4.2012- Copy of Statement of account.

Opposite parties’ side  documents:  Nil  

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.