<br /> COMPLAINT FILED: 28.01.2009<br /> <br /> BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)<br /> <br /> <br /> 15th APRIL 2009<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESENT :- SRI. A.M. BENNUR PRESIDENT <br /> SMT. M. YASHODHAMMA MEMBER <br /> SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA MEMBER <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO.247/2009<br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINANT Sri.B.V.Narayana Rao,S/o Late B.Venkatanna,Aged about 56 years,Residing at No.83,‘Anuradha’, West Anjaneya Temple Street,Basavanagudi,Bangalore – 560 004.Advocate – Sri.RavishankarV/s.<br /> OPPOSITE PARTIES 1. The Manager,ICICI Bank,Andheri, Mumbai.2. The Manager,ICICI Bank,Chamarajpet Branch,Bull Temple Road,Bangalore – 560 004.Advocate – Sri.Jai M Patil<br /> <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed U/s. 12 of the Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the complainant seeking direction to the Opposite Party (herein after called as O.P) to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and for such other relief’s on an allegations of deficiency in service. <br /> <br /> The brief averments, as could be seen from the contents of the complaint, are as under:<br /> <br /> Complainant availed the debit card facility from the OP during the month of April 2005. Complainant was prompt in remitting the amount in due both by way of cash and dropping of the cheques. When complainant checked his statement of account as on 06.10.2007 there was a balance of Rs.58,989/- at his S.B account. Complainant was expecting the receipt of cheque leaves. Though he made repeated requests and demands to OP to send the cheque leaves, he has not received it. For want of the said cheque leaves he was unable to transact with the Bank. Hence suffered both mental agony and financial loss. Not only that OP without the consent of the complainant deducted an insurance premium of Rs.21,285/- and paid it to ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. This arbitrary act of the OP has caused him monetary loss. Hence he felt deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Under the circumstances he is advised to file this complaint and sought for the reliefs accordingly.<br /> <br /> 2. On appearance, OP filed the version mainly contending that ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company is a different entity. It has nothing to do with the present OP. The main grievance of the complainant is about the deduction of premium and sending it to ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company but without making the said insurance company as a party complainant can’t seek the present remedy. OP did deliver the cheque book through the courier service to the given admitted address not once but thrice but all the time the said courier returned with shara no such consignee. Hence no fault lies with the OP. It is further contended that complainant has accorded the permission to deduct the policy amount, hence the said amount wad deducted and sent to the insurance company. The other allegations made by the complainant are all baseless. Complaint is devoid of merits. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Among these grounds, OP prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. In order to substantiate the complaint averments, the complainant filed the affidavit evidence and produced some documents. OP has also filed the affidavit evidence and produced the documents. Then the arguments were heard.<br /> <br /> 4. In view of the above said facts, the points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:<br /> <br /> Point No. 1 :- Whether the complainant has Proved <br /> the deficiency in service on the part of <br /> the OP?<br /> <br /> Point No. 2 :- If so, whether the complainant is <br /> entitled for the relief’s now claimed?<br /> <br /> Point No. 3 :- To what Order?<br /> <br /> <br /> 5. We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, both oral and documentary evidence and the arguments advanced. In view of the reasons given by us in the following paragraphs our findings on:<br /> <br /> Point No.1:- In Negative<br /> Point No.2:- Negative<br /> Point No.3:- As per final Order.<br /> <br /> <br /> R E A S O N S<br /> <br /> 6. On the plain reading of the complaint complainant has availed card facility and opened the savings account at OP Bank. According to him he was expecting the cheque book within a week or so from 30.04.2005 when he opened the account. But for more than 2 years he was unable to receive the cheque book. This contention appears to be very strange. When complainant opened the account in April 2005 what made him to keep mum right up to November 2007 without agitating his rights to get the cheque book is not known. There is no satisfactory explanation about this inaction.<br /> <br /> 7. On the other hand OP has specifically contended that they did send the cheque book through courier service not once but thrice but all the time they got endorsement that no such consignee. OP sent the said cheque book to the given admitted address but it was returned. On every occasion a different courier service is utilized but the result is one and the same. A document to that effect is produced by the OP. Under such circumstances we can only say that OP did try their level best to send the cheque leaves to the complainant to the given admitted address. Unfortunately consignee was not found. Under such circumstances it can’t be held that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP in not sending the cheque book.<br /> <br /> 8. It is further contended by the OP that those cheque leaves were delivered to the complainant on 28.03.2008 but still he has come up with this false complaint which is filed in the month of January 2009. According to OP if complainant was really in need of the cheque book, he would have personally visited their bank and collected the same but no such steps are taken. It is further stated by the OP that the complainant accorded the permission to deduct the policy amount in favour of M/s.ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. <br /> <br /> 9. Admittedly OP is a different entity from ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. Now as could be seen the grievance of the complainant is against the said insurance company, but unfortunately he has not made the said insurance company as a party in this complaint. It is specifically contended by the OP that complainant has accorded the permission with respect to payment of premium by OP to the ICICI Lombard. It is further contended by the OP in para.13 of the version that on the receipt of the complaint from the complainant they have reversed the said amount paid to ICICI Lombard Insurance Company. When that is so that would have been end of the matter. What made the complainant again proceed against OP on some allegations is not known.<br /> <br /> 10. The approach of the complainant does not appear to be fair and honest. Whether he consented for the deduction of the premium to be paid to ICICI Lombard Insurance Company in a usual and regular course of transaction is not known. So viewed from any angle complaint appears to be devoid of merits. There is no proof of deficiency in service. Under such circumstances complainant is not entitled for the relief. Accordingly we answer point Nos.1 & 2 in negative and proceed to pass the following: <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> The complaint is dismissed. In view of the nature of dispute no order as to costs.<br /> <br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by him, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 15th day of April 2009.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Vln* <br /> <br /> <br />