DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (CENTRAL)

                                            ISBT  KASHMERE GATE DELHI

                                                            C.C. NO.613/2008

No. DF/ Central/

DIGAMBAR JHA R/OB71, ARJUN PARK, NAJAFGARH, NEW DELHI

                                                                                                              ... COMPLAINANT

                                                                 V/S

ICICI BANK VIDEOCON TOWER, IIND FLOOR, BLOCK E-1, JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI-110055

                                                                                                           ... OPPOSITE PARTY

Quorum: Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

                  Vikram Kumar Dabas, Member

                 Manju Bala Sharma , Member

                                                                        ORDER                               Dated: 

Mohd. Anwar Alam, President

1. Complainant has filed this complaint on 22.9.2008 and alleged that he was having Savings Account bearing no. 000701021479 with the OP and OP offered him a credit card facility for the same by  credit card no. 5176370136376005. On 22.9.2004 OP sanctioned a loan of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant as he was using Credit Card of the OP wherein EMI of Rs. 908.33 p was to be paid per month and Rs. 900/- as interest in total. Complainant paid EMIs and total amount paid to the OP was 20,225/- from October 2004 to March 2006. Hence, complainant paid Rs. 5,950/- as an extra payment to the OP .  Despite due payment of the credit card OP demanded illegal charge of Rs. 23,953/- dues against him without any justification.   On 18.5.2007, OP bank freezed the balance amount lying in the account of the complainant which  came to the notice of the complainant  when a cheque of Rs. 15,000/- dated 14.10.2007 issued in favour of Sh. Harkishan Sharma got dishonored on 14.10.2007.   Hence, it is prayed that OP be directed to unfreeze the savings account of the complainant and award compensation and cost of litigation to the complainant. 

2. OP admitted that credit card was issued to the complainant and clarified that complainant is bound by the terms and conditions governing the usage of the card and he assured to make payment regularly to the bank as per the periodical statement of the  account which the bank regularly dispatched to the complainant. OP has a lien on the complainant’s savings account with respect to the unpaid outstanding dues payable by the complainant  and  complaint is false and time barred by limitation so it be dismissed with cost.

3. Complainant filed rejoinder and explained that details of the outstanding amount was not given to the complainant and objected the reply. In support of complaint complainant filed his own affidavit along with documents    Ex C1 to Ex-C9.   In support of reply OP filed affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Sharma , Senior Officer (Legal).   Both the parties filed their written arguments.

4. We have heard the arguments and considered the evidence led by the parties and their written and oral arguments.  In this case points to be considered are as under:-

           (a) Whether complainant is a consumer?

            (b) Whether the complaint is time barred.

             (c) Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the OP ?

            ( d) Relief?

5.   As OP has admitted that alleged credit card was issued to the complainant, therefore, admittedly complainant is a “consumer”.

6. Looking to the facts of the case , the actual cause of action arose in this case on 14-10-2007 regarding freezing of the account of complainant and this complaint was filed on 22.9.2008, therefore, complaint is not time barred.

7. The complainant in his affidavit deposed that OP has freezed his account without his approval and authorization and by unfair method. This deposition of the complainantwas not rebutted. OP did not give any notice to the complainant prior to freezing his account. 

8. Looking to the above facts and circumstances we are of the opinion that OP did not give any notice prior to freezing of his account which reflects that OP has caused deficiency in service to the complainant. Accordingly, we direct OP to unfreeze the account of complainant and looking to the long litigation between the parties since 2008 to pay Rs 20,000/- as compensation and  cost of litigation to the complainant. This order will be complied within 30 days failing which an interest @10% p.a. will be payable to the complainant from the date of filing of this complaint.

               9. Copy of the order be made available to the parties free of cost as per law.  File be consigned to record room. 

Announced on this ……………..

        (MANJU BALA SHARMA)         (VIKRAM KR  DABAS)               (M. A. ALAM)                           MEMBER                                     MEMBER                             PRESIDENT