Haryana

Karnal

CC/783/2019

Hemant Tuli - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indusind Bank Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Amit Sachdeva

19 May 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

                                                        Complaint No. 783 of 2019

                                                        Date of instt.26.11.2019

                                                        Date of Decision:19.05.2023

 

1.     Hemant Tuli, resident of house no.730 Sector-7, Urban Estate, Karnal.

2.     Hemant Agencies At-C-715, Dyalpura Gate, Sadar Bazar, Karnal through its proprietor Hemant Tuli.

                                               …….Complainants.

                                              Versus

 

Indusind Bank Limited SCO 254, Sector-12, Part-1, Karnal through its Branch Manager.

                                                                      …..Opposite Party.

 

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and after amendment Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.       

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

          

 Argued by: Shri Amit Sachdeva, counsel for the complainants.

                    Shri Suraj Kanwar, counsel for the OP.

 

ORDER:   

                

                   The complainants have filed the present complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as after amendment Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that complainant is having a saving bank account bearing no.100059779132 with the OP bank. OP recognizing the complainant as a customer with good transaction record, approached to the complainant and persuaded the complainant that there is a very good scheme launched by the bank for existing account holders, who are having good repudiation and good transactions with the bank. The official further said that the bank is providing credit card on a very cheaper rates to its customers and the value of the card is Rs.50,000/- and validity of the card is for lifetime. Also it was told that with the said credit card, bank will provide voucher of value of Rs.50,000/- of Jet Airways and the said value voucher will be redeemed and will be deducted in the amount of tickets of Jet Airways which will purchased by the complainant in future.  In the influence of the said commitment by the bank, the complainant and his mother namely Saroj Bala, who is also saving account with the OP bank, purchased the credit card from the OP  and paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith GST Rs.9000/- and mother of complainant also paid Rs.25,000/- +GST. After that complainant and his mother received the said credit cards. The card number of complainant is 5376521042794008. It was assured by the official of the OP that after first swap of the card, the voucher value of Rs.50,000/- for the card of complainant and voucher of Rs.25,000/- for the card of his mother  will be received. In pursuance of the same, complainant swap the card on 27.07.2018 in order to get voucher and after the swipe, the complainant was surprised to see that jet airways value is not going to be granted against the commitment made, whereas the OP bank gave eight codes for tickets valid till 28.02.2019 for the eight jet airways tickets, which was against the settled conditions of the credit card. The complainant enquired at the customer care centre regarding the same but it was very shocking to know that the eight codes for tickets of jet airways have been provided to complainant and it was told to complainant that only eight tickets of domestic flights can be availed in lieu of the voucher instead of total voucher of Rs.50,000/- value. Complainant told to the customer care of the bank that the commitment was to provide Rs.50,000/- voucher that can be redeemed to the tickets of the jet airways at any time for anywhere in the world, but the customer care did not listen to the complainant and become adamant not to provide voucher of Rs.50,000/-. Being aggrieved on the hands of the OP, complainant requested to return the both credits card to OP but OP refused to get returned the credit card and stated that the voucher codes have been generated for the credit card of complainant, but the card of the mother of complainant was returned as the voucher codes were not generated till time.

2.             It is further averred that complainant is also having a current account with the OP in the name of Hemant Agencies bearing account no.201001986816 and the complainant is having swap machine installed at his business premises. And there is another firm of complainant i.e. Ritvik Import & Export Pvt. Ltd. Karnal. The complainant’s firm Ritvik Import & Export Pvt. Ltd. Karnal purchased goods from his firm Hemant Agencies and in order to clear the due amounts of the said purchase, complainant swiped his credit card on 27.09.2018 for purchase of goods from Hemant Agencies Jundla Gate Karnal on swap machine of Indusind Bank i.e. swap machine no.S/N 72312773 linked with the account no.201001986816 of Hemant Agencies for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and the amount was deducted from the credit card of the complainant, but the said amount has not been credited in the current account of Hemant Agencies. The complainant made a complaint to the OP in this regard but OP neither transferred the amount in the account of Hemant Agencies nor it has been returned in the credit card account of complainant. Moreover, the OP is charging interest in the credit card account of complainant and also delay charges and penalties has been leveled by the bank without any cause. Till date an amount of Rs.95,000/- approximately has been debited in the credit card account of complainant by the OP from the period of September, 2018 to November, 2019. In this regard, complainant wrote many emails to the OP either to return the said amount or to transfer the same in the account of the seller i.e. Hemant Agencies as well as to waive off the interest and penal charges leveled by the OP bank, but OP bank has not returned the amount in the credit card account of complainant till dated. Complainant also sent a letter dated 08.12.2018 to the OP and requested to return the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- but all in vain. Thereafter, OP illegally debits money from the saving account of complainant i.e. account no.100059779132 and from current account of complainant i.e. account no.201001986816. The following amounts have been debited by the OP bank from the abovesaid two accounts of complainant.

a)     Rs.55198/- on 26.10.2018

b)     Rs.93/- on 28.01.2019.

c)     Rs.437/- on 26.04.2019 all from the saving account.

d)     Rs.42,829/- on 11.09.2019.

e)     Rs.2850/- on 30.10.2019 all from the current account.

 

The complainant enquired about the same from the officials of the OP and then they revealed that such type of transaction is not allowed whereas on the same day the complainant swapped the HDFC card for Rs.2,00,000/- which was not credited and then the complainant raised the disputes to the dispute form and on the IDs given by the OP bank for resolving the dispute. The HDFC bank resolved the dispute and did not generate the bill whereas OP bank issued details in order to harass the complainant generated the bill for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- which was never received by the complainant and complainant is receiving continuously mail for depositing the said amount. Now complainant has received a message that an amount of Rs.2,23,000/- is due and outstanding. Again on 09.08.2019, the OP bank send a vague and false letter whereby it was demanded that an amount of Rs.2,47,126/-was stated as due amount in the credit card account of complainant. Due to this act and conduct of the OP, the CIBIL score of complainant has become very bad and due to the bad CIBIL score, the complainant is unable to avail any financial facilities from the financial institutions as well as banks for his day to day financial requirements of his work/livelihood and due to which, the complainant has suffered huge financial loss. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence this complaint.

3.             On notice, OP appeared and filed its written version, raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; jurisdiction; cause of action and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that complicated questions of facts are involved therein, which requires detailed evidence, which is not possible under the summary procedure as applicable to this Commission, as such the present complaint is liable to be relegated to Civil Court and the complaint deserves to be returned to the complainant. It is further pleaded that complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground that complainant is not a consumer as defined under the Consumer Protection Act. Hemant Tuli, complainant used the ‘Pinnacle Credit Card’ for INR 150000/-which can only be possibly used if the said card is being used for commercial purpose, and merchant cannot use his own card on his own firm being himself as proprietor as per guideline, a such, complainant does not come under the ambit of the term ‘consumer’ as defined under the Consumer Protection Act. It is further pleaded that in the month of March, 2018, complainant no.1 approached the OP and requested for issuance of credit card. Features of the card were explained to the complainant. Complainant after going through the terms and conditions of the credit card, signed the application form for issuance of Pinnacle Credit card. Schedule of charges were duly signed by complainant. Upon receipt of application form and KYC documents, joining fees, bank issued Pinnacle Credit card bearing no.5376 5210 4279 4008 to the complainant. Complainant was charged joining fees of Rs.50,000/- plus taxes. On 19.03.2018 complainant signed customer acknowledgement form, it is clearly mentioned and signed by complainant that “The One time joining fees once charged or accrued shall not be reversed or refunded for any reason whatsoever.” As welcome gift complainant was issued 8 one way Jet Airways Promo Codes. Jet Airways promotion codes entitled Jet Airways customer to book a one way journey of your choice. The promotion codes will enable customer to avail 100% discount on base fare and Airline Fuel Charges. All applicable taxes and other charges are required to be paid by the customer using the Indusind Bank Credit Card. Bank only provides the banking services to the people for deposit and withdrawal of the money. Bank’s responsibility in the present offer is limited to communicating the code to the Eligible Cardholders on their listed mobile numbers and email address. On 21^st July, 2018 complainant contacted helpline number and requested to dispatch the welcome gift. Complimentary 08 One-way Jet codes were sent on his registered mobile number and email address on 27.07.2018 which were valid till 28.02.2019. On 27.07.2018, complainant again contacted helpline number and requested to exchange the Welcome Gift from 50K Jet Fee plan Codes to 50K Genesis Vouchers. The request was declined by Bank stating that customer has already claimed his welcome gift, hence it cannot be changed nor can be exchanged. It is further pleaded that due to non-payment of outstanding dues current status of credit card no.5376 5210 4279 4008 is “write off”.

4.             It is further pleaded that Smt. Saroj Bala applied for Signature Legend credit card on 19.03.2018 with one time joining fee of Rs.25,000/- alongwith applicable tax levied in May, 2018 statement. Smt. Saroj Bala had contacted on 27.07.2018 and claimed that she was not informed about the GST component on card joining fees. Further, she claims that she was assured the Jet Codes would provide a benefit of the entire cost of the ticket booking done on Jet. Wherein the promotional code covers only the Base Fare and Airline Fuel charges. Bank being customer centric, as an exception considering the fact that the customer had not claimed her welcome gift, bank reversed the onetime card joining fees and cancelled the card no.4147 5240 4145 5002 in August, 2018. It is denied that OP bank is liable to return disputed amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as the same is credited on 29.02.2020. It is also denied that OP bank is liable to pay Rs.1,01,407/- and also denied that OP bank is liable to clear the CIBIL record of complainant and report the same as good score with immediate effect and refund the cost of credit card with GST i.e. Rs.59,000/- paid to bank as one time non-refundable joining fees. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. Learned counsel for the OP relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Muni Mahesh Patel, IV(2006) CPJ 1(SC).

5.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

6.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of account summary regarding credit card purchase Ex.C1, copy of account summary deduction of credit card charges Rs.1,50,000/- Ex.C2, copy of account summary regarding Pinnacle credit card for the period from 04.10.2018 to 03.11.2019 Ex.C3 to Ex.C14-B, copy of email dated 20.10.2018 Ex.C15, copy of letter dated 08.12.2018 Ex.C16, copy of bills dated 10.07.2018,18.07.2018, 22.09.2018, 22.09.2018 Ex.C17 to Ex.C20, copy of statement of account of complainant no.1 dated 01.11.2017 Ex.C21, copy of statement of account of Hemant Agencies from 01.08.2019 to 21.11.2019 Ex.C22, copy of notice of bank dated 09.08.2019 Ex.C23 and closed the evidence on 03.12.2021 by suffering separate statement.

7.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP has tendered into evidence affidavit of Shefali Bansal, Branch Manager Ex.OP1/A, copy of credit card application Ex.OP1, copy of terms and conditions of Jet Airways booking Ex.OP2, copy of customer acknowledgement form Ex.OP3, copy of credit card application form of Saroj Bala Ex.OP4, copy of statement of account Ex.OP5 and closed the evidence on 08.12.2022 by suffering separate statement.

8.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

9.             Admittedly, complainant no.1 is having a saving bank account bearing no.100059779132 with the OP bank. It is also admitted that complainant and his mother purchased the credits cards from the OP bank and paid Rs.50,000/- and Rs.25,000/- alongwith GST to the OP.

10.           As per the version of the complainants, after swap the credit card bearing no.5376521042794008 on 27.07.2018, the jet airways value has not been granted against the commitment made, whereas OP bank has given eight codes for tickets valid till 28.02.2019 for the eight jet airways tickets which was against the settled conditions of the credit cards. Complainant is also having a current account with the OP bank in the name of Hemant Agencies bearing account no.201001986816 and complainant swiped the card on 27.09.2018 for purchase of goods and an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was deducted from the credit card account of the complainant, but said purchase amount of Rs.1,50,000/- has not been credited in the current account of Hemant Agencies. The onus to prove its version was relied upon the complainants but complainants have miserably failed to prove their version by leading any cogent and convincing evidence that OP bank has wrongly deducted the abovesaid amount from the account of complainant.

11.           In the present case, complicated questions of fact are involved, which requires detailed evidence, which cannot be decided in summary process and without leading detailed evidence and cross examination upon the witnesses by the parties. Hence, the best platform to decide the matter in dispute is the Civil Court where elaborate and detailed evidence can be produced by the parties. In this regard, we are relying upon the observations made in the case titled as Love Motels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh 2007 (4) CPJ Page 305 (NC) wherein it has been observed by the Hon’ble National Commission that complicated issues involved, not adjudicable summarily-Dismissed with liberty to seek remedy in Civil Court. In case titled as M/s The Bills through its Proprietor Versus PNB reported in 1998 (1) CPC page 150, decided by Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandigarh wherein it has been held that complicated issues being involved, the matter needs to be decided Civil Court-Complaint stands dismissed. In  Muni Mahesh Patel’s case (supra) wherein it is held that civil court is the appropriate form to decide cases which are complicated in nature and in which oral and documentary evidences are required to be led”.

12.           Hence without going into the merits of the complaint, we dispose off the complaint. However, complainants are at liberty to approach the Court/Civil Court of competent jurisdiction, if so desired and in that eventuality, the complainants will be entitled to the benefit of Section 14(2) of Limitation Act and the time taken during the pendency of this complaint shall be exempted. No order as to cost. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced:

Dated:19.05.2023                                                                      

                                                                  President,

                                                       District Consumer Disputes

                                                       Redressal Commission, Karnal.

               

                (Vineet Kaushik)        (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

                         Member                    Member