Delhi

New Delhi

CC/913/2010

Pankul Rathore - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Citi Bank - Opp.Party(s)

28 Feb 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC.913/2010                                                                     Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. Pankul Rathore,

R/o House No.2,

Charak Enclave,

Jammu Cantt., J&K-180004.

 

Also at:

 Pankul Rathore,

Spaak Forum 50, BLK NO.5,

Ground Floor, Erose Garden,

Charmwood, Faridabad, Haryana-121004.

                           ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

Citi Bank,

Personal Loan Department,

Citibank Center,

7^th Floor, Bandra Kurla Comples,

Bandra(E), Mumbai-400051 ( Maharashtra).

 

Also at:

 

Citibank N.A.,

Jeevan Bharti, 124,

Connaught Circus,

New Delhi-110001.

                      Opposite Party

 

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant was a credit card holder of OP Bank. OP  sanctioned the personal loan and transferred the funds in his account bearing No.02LCBTP2834019.  The complainant has cleared all the outstanding dues of OP for above mentioned credit card and the credit card is showing the nil balance.  Further when the complainant applied for the credit card for business purpose and some personal use from  some other bank, the application of complainant was immediately rejected by the other bank due to reasons that the name of complainant was falling under the category of the list of the defaulters, which leads complainant to face extreme humiliation not only in front of his friends but also in front of Business Associates. The legal notices dated 18.7.09 and 2.6.2009 sent to the OP with the direction to withdraw the name of the complainant from the CIBIL defaulter list, but OP neither replied to the legal notice nor had complied the same, hence this complaint.

 2.     Complaint has been contested by the OP. In its reply OP stated that as per the provision of the Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act 2005, this Forum does not have jurisdiction over matters regarding reporting of credit information to any Credit Information Company. It is submitted that CIBIL does not maintain any Defaulter List.  CIBIL just provides a credit information of the borrowers to the Credit Institutions in order to enable them to determine the credit worthiness of borrower, therefore, the averment of the complainant  on the basis of which he seeks removal of his name from CIBIL’s record is wrong and baseless.  It is further stated that it has always acted in accordance with the CIP(Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act 2005 as well as guidelines of RBI.  It is also submitted that the complainant has deliberately  concealed the fact that he had been regularly defaulting in repaying dues towards the Personal Loan availed from the OP on August 24,2004 for a tenure of 48 months with a EMI of Rs.9781/- and there were 56 instances wherein the EMIs presented through ECS were returned by his being unpaid for financial reasons.  Moreover, from November 2007 to July 2008, the complainant did not make any payment towards his EMIs which leads that the complainant had violated the terms and conditions of the personal loan agreement executed between the parties.  As  a result of non-payment of EMIs for more than 120 days, the account of the complainant was moved into write off status. On July, 29, 2008 made a payment of Rs.93039.46/- which leads to his  account moving into write off status.  It is further stated that the complainant has not produced a single document/letter from any other bank rejecting the application for credit facilities to the complainant.   It is submitted that the OP cannot be held liable for action of other banks in rejecting the request of loan by the complainant.  Prayed for dismissal of complaint.

3.     Both the parties have filed their evidences by way of Affidavits.

4.     We have heard the arguments advanced at the Bar and have perused the record.

5.     We are in agreement with the contention of the counsel for the OP.  The bare perusal of the entire complaint and annexure attached with it shows that the complaint is without any substance.  The complainant has failed to averred in his complaint as to which bank  he had applied for personal loan/credit card facility and the same has been rejected.  The OP has stated in his written statement that the complainant had failed to honour the ECS on the respective dates.  As  a result of non-payment of EMIs for more than 120 days, the account of the complainant was moved into write off status. The complainant has filed the rejoinder as well as his evidence.  The complainant has not rebutted to the allegations of delaying the payment of  EMIs alleged by the OP.  This shows that the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and there was a delay on his part in honouring the ECS as per the contract between the parties. 

6.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that the complainant has failed to establish his case of deficiency in services against OP. The present complaint is devoid of merit, same is hereby dismissed

 

 Copy of the order may be  forwarded  to  the parties free of cost as statutorily required. File be consigned to Record Room. The orders be uploaded on www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.

 

Announced in open Forum on 13/03/2019.

 

 

                                         (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

    PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                            (H M VYAS)

                    MEMBER                                                        MEMBER