BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

PRESENT

SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER

C.C. No. 242/2007 Filed on 27.11.2007

Dated : 30.07.2010

Complainant:

C. Jayachandran, S/o Chellappan Pillai, Moolayil Veedu, T.C 41/381, Manacaud, Manacaud P.O, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. Emmanuel Chathanchira)

Opposite parties:-

1. Manager, S.B.I Cards & Payment Services Pvt. Ltd, P.O. Bag No. 28, G.P.O, New Delhi-110 001.

Additional opposite party:

2. The Branch Manager, SBI Credit Cards, IV Floor, Rohini Building, Panavila Junction, Thiruvananthapuram.

(By adv. A. Abdul Kharim)

This O.P having been heard on 21.06.2010, the Forum on 30.07.2010 delivered the following:

ORDER

SMT. BEENAKUMARI.A: MEMBER

Brief facts of the case are as follows: Complainant is the resident of the above said address and is conducting a Mat shop at Chalai Market, Thiruvananthapuram. The 1^st opposite party offered their service to the complainant by way of credit card facility from 2004 December onwards. The credit facility availed to the complainant vide credit card No. 4006 6760 1480 8383. The cash facility availed to him is for Rs. 75,000/- maximum. The complainant is paying bills regularly to the 2^nd opposite party from December 2004 to May 2007, from the bill of June 2007 the complainant feels that the opposite party is charging a huge amount by way of different pen names like cheque pick up fee, fee payment not received by due date, insurance administration charge, protect plus insurance credit shield, protect plus insurance PA premium, finance charge etc. These types of charges are against the Rules and Regulations of Reserve Bank of India and one of his friend working in a Government financial institution advised him to stop the credit facility with immediate effect and stopped the same in the end of May 2007. Complainant has already remitted a huge amount in the said names from the date of credit facility availed to him till May 2007. Recently complainant is facing severe financial problem and the same is intimated to the opposite party through their representative Rajesh. Bill for the month of June issued by the 1^st opposite party is Rs. 86,988.16 and immediately complainant approached the representative of the 2^nd opposite party Trivandrum and expressed his inability to remit a huge bill for Rs. 86,988.16 and sent letter to the opposite party in writing. Accordingly on 28.06.2007 the 1^st opposite party issued a settlement letter to the complainant to settle the whole matter to a tune of Rs. 46,000/- by way of eight equal instalments. The representative of the 2^nd opposite party came to his house continuously with gundas and compelled and threatened the complainant and his family members. So the complainant was forced to pay Rs. 5,750/- by way of cash to the representative Rajesh. Now the complainant received a bill for the month of October 2007 demanding to remit Rs. 97,987.83 as total outstanding and on 15.11.2007 the complainant received the statement of November 2007 for Rs. 99,129.50 and in that statement, it is stated Rs. 3,000/- is paid by the complainant on 30.10.2007 by cheque No. 114606. After June 2007 no payment is made by him till date, so the statement issued by 1^st opposite party is false and wrong. Later on 08.11.2007 the 1^st opposite party issued letter to the complainant stating that cheque for Rs. 3,000/- was later as unpaid. Complainant never issued such a cheque to the opposite party. So it is very clear that the statement of account and demand of the opposite party is not believable in the eye of law. The 1^st opposite party already collected a huge amount as cheque pick up fee, payment dishonour fee, fee payment received by due date, finance charges etc. These charges are illegal, improper and against the provisions of law. Before getting the last two the complainant issued legal notice to the 1^st opposite party on 09.07.2007 demanding to write off the whole amount and the 1^st opposite party received the notice on 20.07.2007. Even the receipt of the above said notice the 1^st opposite party did not send any reply to the complainant or to his lawyer till date and not write off the amount till date. The 1^st opposite party is sending bills frequently and their representatives and gundas regularly coming to the house of the complainant and threatening the whole family only with an intention to extract money illegally. In these circumstances, the complainant has no other remedy than to approach this Hon'ble Forum with this complaint for getting redressal of grievances.

In this case opposite parties remained exparte.

The complainant in this case filed proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination and he has produced 9 documents which were marked as Exts. P1 to P9.

The points that arise for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service occurred from the side of opposite parties?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any reliefs and costs?

Points (i) & (ii):- The case of the complainant is that through the credit facility services, the opposite parties charged huge amounts in various heads from the complainant. This complaint is for directing the opposite parties to write off the balance amount due to the 1^st opposite party as per credit card No. 4006 6760 1480 8383 and for refund of Rs. 5,750/- which is collected by the opposite party by way of threatening and for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for deficiency in service, mental pain and financial loss etc.

To prove his contentions, the complainant has filed proof affidavit and produced 9 documents which were marked as Exts. P1 to P9. The document marked as Ext.P1 is the monthly statement for the month of June for Rs. 86,988.16. As per this document the complainant had paid Rs. 4,200/- to the opposite party. Ext. P2 is the settlement letter dated 28.06.2007 issued by the opposite party to the complainant. As per this letter the opposite parties agreed to settle the account for an amount of Rs. 46,000/- as full and final settlement. Ext. P3 is the copy of payment receipt dated 28.06.2007 for Rs. 5,750/- paid by the complainant to the opposite parties. Ext. P4 is the copy of advocate notice issued by the complainant to the 1^st opposite party. Ext. P5 is the copy of postal receipt. Ext. P6 is the copy of reply from GPO dated 02.08.2007 stating that the notice issued to the 1^st opposite party was served on 20.07.2007. Ext. P7 is the copy of statement for the month of October 2007 issued by the 1^st opposite party for Rs. 97,987.83. Ext. P8 is the statement for the month of November 2007 for Rs. 99,129.50. Ext. P9 is the letter dated 08.11.2007 issued by the 1^st opposite party to the complainant stating that cheque for Rs. 3,000/- is returned as unpaid. Complainant has stated that he did not issue such a cheque to the 1^st opposite party. From these documents we cannot find what was the amount illegally obtained by the opposite parties from the complainant. Complainant submits that opposite parties obtained huge amounts from the complainant on various illegal heads. As per Exts. P3, P7 and P9 statements are very clear. The opposite parties have deducted the payment made by the complainant from the total outstanding. But the opposite parties levied huge amounts at various heads like cheque pick up fee, payment dishonour fee, for payment not received by due date and finance charges. We find that these charges are improper and against law. As per Ext. P1 monthly statement the opposite parties demanded Rs. 86,988.16 from the complainant. As per the request of the complainant opposite parties agreed to settle the account for Rs. 46,000/-. This settlement itself is the proof that the opposite parties unlawfully claimed huge amounts from the customers. Hence there is unfair trade practice and deficiency in service from their side. But in this case the complainant has failed to prove how much amount the opposite parties unlawfully charged from him from 2004 onwards. Complaint itself is vague. As per Ext. P2 settlement letter the opposite parties have agreed to settle the matter for an amount of Rs. 46,000/-. We also find that this settlement is reasonable and genuine. Out of that agreed amount the complainant has paid Rs. 5,750/- on 28.06.2007 as per Ext. P3 document. Hence we find that the complainant has to pay the balance amount from the settlement amount offered i.e; Rs. 46,000-Rs. 5,750/-. Hence the complaint is partly allowed.

In the result, the complainant has to pay Rs. 40,250/- to the opposite parties and the opposite parties shall close all the claims against the complainant and close the entire transaction. Time for compliance one month from the date of receipt of the order. Otherwise the opposite parties shall have the right to realise this amount with agreed annual interest from the complainant till the date of realization. This Forum direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the complainant.

A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 30^th day of July 2010.

BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER

G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT

S.K. SREELA : MEMBER

jb

C.C. No. 242/2007

APPENDIX

I COMPLAINANT'S WITNESS :

PW1 - C. Jayachandran

II COMPLAINANT'S DOCUMENTS :

P1 - Copy of monthly statement dated 01.06.2007

P2 - Copy of settlement letter dated 28.06.2007

P3 - Copy of payment receipt dated 28.06.2007 for Rs. 5,750/-.

P4 - Copy of advocate notice dated 09.07.2007

P5 - Copy of postal receipt dated 09.07.2007

P6 - Copy of reply from GPO dated 20.08.2007.

P7 - Copy of statement for the month of 10/07 issued by the 1^st

opposite party.

P8 - Copy of statement for the month of 11/07.

P9 - Copy of letter dated 08.11.2007 issued by the 1^st opposite

party.

III OPPOSITE PARTY'S WITNESS :

NIL

IV OPPOSITE PARTY'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL

PRESIDENT

jb