Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

82/2006

V.Geetha - Complainant(s)

Versus

Managing Director,Standard Chartered Bank & others - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. S.Subramanian

15 Dec 2016

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   04.02.2004

                                                                        Date of Order :   15.12.2016

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU. S. PANDIAN, B.Sc., L.L.M.                       : PRESIDENT            

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

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

C.C.NO. 82/2006

THURSDAY THIS  15^TH  DAY OF DECEMBER 2016

 

V.Geetha,

No.6, Jeenis Road,

Saidapet, Chennai 600 015                              ..Complainant

                                              ..Vs..

1.Managing Director,

Standard Chartered Bank,

India Bank Card Center

3^rd and 4^th Floor,

Raheja Point,

Magarath Road,

Bangalore 560 025

 

2. The Manager,

Standard Chartered Bank,

Bank Card Customer Service Center,

Raja Rajeswari Towers,

29-30 Dr.Radhakrishnan Road,

Chennai-4

 

3. Officer,Debt Management

Cards Services Division,

Standard Charterd Bank,

No.1, Haddows Road

Chennai 600 006

 

4. The Manager,

G.I.G Credits rep.by S.Vijaya Raghavan

48/28 Sarangapani Street, T.Nagar,

Chennai 600 017

 

5. Regional Manager,

Standard Chartered Bank,

Raja Rajeswari Towers,

29-30 Dr.Radhakrishnan Road,Chennai-4

6. Par XL Agencies, represented by

C.Rajkumar & I.Md.Iqbal

Shop No.31, 1^st Floor, Gemini Park Menere

602, Annasalai

Chennai 600 006

 

7. The Manager,

Recoveries

Standard Chartered Bank,

Magarath Road,

Bangalore 560 025                                                  ..Opposite parties

 

Counsel for Complainant                       : M/s S.Subramani

Counsel for Opposite parties 1,2,3,5 &7 : M/s N.V.S. & Associates

Opposite parties 4 and 6                       : Exparte     

 

ORDER

THIRU. S. PANDIAN, PRESIDENT

          This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation for mental agony and hardship suffered by the complainant due to the unethical unfair trade practices and deficiency in service.

1.  The averment of the complaint are brief as follows:

        The complainant at the instance of opposite parties, she made full and final payments towards the credit cards No. 5543 7847 3001 4390 vide Dena Bank Banker’s pay order N 703110 dated 6.8.2002 for Rs.20,000/-. The receipts acknowledging the above payments have been issued on 8.8.2002 by 4^th or 6^th opposite parties. The card Nos 4040 7980 2005 5015 and 4563 9810 3951 7208 were settled earlier by way of one time statement and the account were closed.  The card No. 5543 7840 3001 4390 was neither used nor operated for more than 2 years. In spite of the full and final payments made for the above said card, the opposite parties have been constantly harassing the complainant thoroughly by mails, sending collection agents like 4^th opposite party and 6^th opposite party being goondas and thugs to the residence and workplace of the complainant of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board at No.60, Gowdia Mutt Road, Royapettah, Chennai 600 014.

2.     The opposite parties are given to the habit of extorting money and are causing mental agony and hardship by threatening the complainant and her family members at their residence. The complainant has given complaint to the authorities and also issued a notice through her Lawyer dated 12.8.2003 deploring the unfair trade practice and deficiency in service of the opposite parties for which all of them are jointly, equally and severally liable. The opposite parties till date have neither replied to her letters nor cared t desist in Perpetration of their illegal acts.  The complainant has effectively paid nearly 60-80% interest per annum. Hence the complaint.

3. Written Version of  opposite parties 1,2,3,5 & 7 are  in briefly as follows:

        The opposite parties 1,2,3,5 &7 denies all the allegations/averments leveled by the complainant as false, frivolous, baseless, vexatious and not maintainable either on fact or in law, except those that are specifically admitted herein. The said opposite parties submit with regard to para No.3 of the complaint though it is true that the complainant availed Credit card facilities, but it is not true that the complainant paid regularly to the said Credit Card Accounts.   

4.       The opposite parties submit that no one time settlement was granted in respect of Card Numbers 4940 7680 2005 5015 and 4563 9810 3951 7208.  That no Full Settlement Letter in respect of Card No. 5543 7840 3001 4390 was issued nor was the account paid and closed in full by the complainant. It is also submitted that so long as, public money remain uncollected, the said opposite parties will resort to initiating recovery steps in respect of a sticky/irregular loan/dues, cannot be considered as harassment. The said opposite parties however deny that they sent any goondas or thug as agents.

5.         As of date, the complainant is due by a sum of Rs.78,176/- to the said opposite parties in respect of the said Credit Cards. The complainant has malafidely coloured and called the lawful recovery method as threat, intimidation and harassment which are totally false. The opposite parties have not received any lawyer notice dated 12.8.2003 alleged to have been sent to the said opposite parties and as such the question of replying the notice does not arise. It is a vague averment made by the complainant that she has paid nearly 60% to 80% interest per annum. It is also a fact that the rules with regard to application of interest and other charges, for ready reference, are printed on the back of the every Credit Card Statement sent to the complainant. The complainant does not have any cause of action. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed with costs.

6.        Opposite parties 4 and 6 are called absent set exparte.

7.       In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit along with his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A21 marked. Ex.B1 to Ex.B3 marked on the side of the opposite parties 1,2,3,5 &7.

 

8.   At this juncture, the point for the consideration before this

        Forum is:  

 

 

1.  Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the 

     Opposite parties as alleged in the complaint?

 

2.  Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief as prayed for?

9. Point No.1

         As per the averments of the complaint and the evidence put-forth on the side of the complainant, it is learnt that inspite of the full and final  payments made in respect of the Credit Card No. 5543 7840 3001 4390 vide Cheque Ex.A.11, Dena Bankers pay order No. 703110 dated 6.8.2002 for Rs.20,000/-. There after the complainant has neither used nor operated the above said card for more than two years, the opposite parties have been constantly harassing the complainant by mails, sending collection Agents opposite parties 4 and 6 being goondas to the residence and work place of the complainant and thereby causing mental agony and hardship to the complainant as well as to the family members. The cash receipt for payment is marked as Ex.A.1 to A.8, A.12, Ex.A.13 & 14.

10.    It is further learnt that in continuation of the threatening and harassment of the opposite parties, the complainant had written Ex.A.9 and A.10 to the 2^nd opposite party and also issued a legal notice Ex.A.17 to the opposite parties 1 to 6 and also preferred the police complaint which is marked as Ex.A.20 to the Inspector of Police, Saidapet Police Station. Even then the opposite parties did not come forward to rectify the defects. The Statement of Account is marked as Ex.A.15, A.16,A.18 and Ex.A.19. The reply letter sent by the 7^th opposite party to the complainant is marked as Ex.A.21.

11.    While being so on perusal of the evidence deposed by the opposite parties 1 to 3 and 7, it is seen that it is not true that the complainant had paid regularly in the alleged credit card account and also no, one time settlement, was granted in respect of the card No. 5543 7840 3001 4390 and similarly no full settlement letter in respect of the above said credit card in order to close in full by the complainant. It is further narrated that so long as public money as not collected, the opposite parties have willing to initiate action as permitted by the credit card rules.  But never sent any goondas or Agents as of date, the complainant is due by a sum of Rs.78,176/- to the said opposite parties in respect of the said Credit Cards. The same has been elicited through Ex.B.1 to Ex.B.3.  Furthermore it is not correct that the opposite parties have received any legal notice dated 12.08.2003 and therefore there is no question of replying the notice has arrived. Therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties as alleged in the complaint.

12.       At this juncture, on careful perusal of the rival submissions on put-forth on either side, it is crystal clear that it is admitted that the  alleged credit card Number had been issued by the opposite parties to the complainant similarly the payment of Rs.20,000/- have been made by Dena Bank, Banker’s order, have credited in the credit card Account of the complainant. In such circumstances, this Forum has to consider whether it is true that the complainant has paid the full amount in the alleged credit card No. 5543 7840 3001 4390 and thereby no dues.

13.       In order to prove the said fact, the complainant had produced Ex.A.1 to A.8 and A.11 to A.14. At this point of time, it is contended by the opposite parties that there is a due of Rs.78,176/- in respect of the alleged credit card.  If it is so, it is the duty of the opposite parties to prove the same by means of relevant documents. At the outset Ex.B.3, the minimum amount shown as 0 (Zero). Therefore, regarding the alleged due of Rs.78,176/- as alleged by the opposite parties has not been properly explained through acceptable documents.   Not only that,  if there is such due in the credit card account of the complainant, the opposite party ought to have given reply in the day one, the complainant issued a legal notice Ex.A.17. But the opposite parties have failed to do so which clearly reveals the fact that the allegations made the complaint becomes true.  Therefore the plea taken by the opposite party lost its merits.  

14.      From the foregoing other facts from the circumstances, this Forum can easily comes to the conclusion that there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties and the same has been proved by the complainant beyond all reasonbale doubts. Thus the point No.1 is answered accordingly.

15. Point No.2 

       As per the decision arrived in point No.1,  it goes without saying that  the complainant is entitled  for reasonable compensation for causing mental agony due to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties 1,2,3,5 and 7 only along with cost.  Thus the point No.2 is answered accordingly.

 

         In the result, this complaint is allowed in part. Accordingly, the opposite parties 1,2,3,5 and 7 are jointly and severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for causing mental agony due to deficiency of service on the part of  them and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) towards cost to the complainant.  In respect of opposite parties 4 and 6, this complaint is dismissed.

 

  The above amounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a till the date of payment.

        Dictated by the President to the Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  15^th  day  of  December 2016.

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainant’s side documents:

Ex.A1          29.10.2001           Copy of receipt

Ex.A.2                   19.12.2001           Copy of Chelan

Ex.A.3                   19.12.2001                    Copy of Chelan

Ex.A.4                   12.1.2002             Copy of Chelan

Ex.A.5                   12.1.2002             Copy of Chelan

Ex.A.6                   12.1.2002             Copy of Chelan

Ex.A.7                   23.3.2002             Copy of Receipt

Ex.A.8                   18.4.2002             Copy of Receipt

Ex.A.9                   24.6.2002             Copy of Reminder letter

Ex.A.10       6.8.2002               Copy of letter

Ex.A.11                                    Copy of Bankers Pay order

Ex.A.12       8.8.2002               Copy of Receipt

Ex.A.13       15.2.2003             Copy of receipt

Ex.A.14       29.6.2003             Copy of Receipt

Ex.A.15       3.8.2003               Copy of Statement

Ex.A.16       3.8.2003               Copy of statement

Ex.A.17       12.8.2003             Copy of Advocate’s Notice

Ex.A.18       3.11.2003             Copy of Statement

Ex.A.19       3.11.2003             Copy of Statement

Ex.A.20       27.11.2003           Copy of Complaint.         

Ex.A.21       5.11.2003             Copy of Letter

Opposite parties’ side documents:-

Ex.B.1         27.4.2006   Copy of Credit card history

Ex.B.2         20.8.2002   Copy of Credit card statement 

Ex.B.3         03.09.2002 Copy of Credit Card Statement

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.