Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

382/2010

Moorthy - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. Hong Kong and Shangai Banking Corp. &another - Opp.Party(s)

D.Arun Kumar

07 Aug 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 23.10.2010

                                                                          Date of Order : 07.08.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

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

 

PRESENT: THIRU. M. MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B, M.L.                    : PRESIDENT

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

 

C.C. No.382/2010

DATED THIS TUESDAY THE 07^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018

                                 

L. Moorthy,

S/o. Mr. K. Lakshmanan,

No.8/13, Ganapathy Colony,

Sriram Nagar,

Selaiyur,

Chennai – 600 073.                                                       .. Complainant.                                              

 

           ..Versus..

 

1. M/s. Hongkong and Shangai

Banking Corporation Ltd.,

Credit Card Division,

Rep. by its General Manager,

Dr. Radha Krishnan Salai,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

2. M/s. HSBC Pragati Finance,

Rep. by its General Manager,

Plot No.139/140 B, Western Express Highway,

Sahar Road Junction,

Vile Parle (East),

Mumbai -400 057.                                                 ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant           :  M/s. D. Arun Kumar & another

Counsel for opposite parties    :  M/s. Mothilal, Goda & another     

 

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

       This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying to refund a sum of Rs.1,100/- collected illegally from the complainant with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. and to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony, and pain caused to the complainant.

1. The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:-

The complainant states that the opposite parties’ executives approached the  complainant and obtained signature in the application form for credit card and issued a credit card bearing No.4476929982829902.  The complainant never used the credit card but received monthly statement showing the transaction over Rs.5,000/-.  When the complainant approached the customer care, there was no proper reply.  The complainant also received calls from various collection agents for the alleged due of Rs.5,000/- with abusive language.   The complainant was threatened by the opposite parties that his name will be included in the CIBIL and black listed from availing loans.   Due to such harassment by the collection agents of the opposite parties, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,100/- as full and final settlement of his credit card.  The opposite parties sent a monthly statement continuously claiming a sum of Rs.10,105.68/- in the month of April 2009.   Hence the complainant issued legal notice dated:17.05.2009 and there was no proper response from the opposite parties.   The act of the opposite parties in claiming huge amount without any transaction amounts to deficiency in service.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties is as follows:

The opposite parties specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties state that after accepting the terms and conditions, the complainant availed the credit card facility.   The allegation of no transaction by the complainant is absolutely false.   All statements sent by the opposite parties only show the valid transactions.   Further the opposite parties state that the allegation of payment of Rs.1,100/- by the complainant towards full and final settlement of credit card use is absolutely false.  The said payment was made only a part amount due.  The opposite parties have acted squarely as per norms and as such the complainant having accepted the Credit Card terms and conditions cannot turn around and dispute the same when the complainant was fully aware that as per the accepted terms and conditions, the opposite parties are entitled to charge interest at the agreed rate on amounts outstanding.  Further the opposite parties state that if there are dues to the bank and there is a default in payment, the matter will be referred to CIBIL.    Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.     To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the opposite parties.

4.     The points for consideration is:-        

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to get a refund of a sum of Rs.1,100/- with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, deficiency in service with cost as prayed for?

5.      On point:-

Heard both sides.   Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  The learned Counsel for the complainant contended that the opposite parties’ executives approached the  complainant and obtained signature in the application form for credit card and issued a credit card bearing No.4476929982829902.  The complainant never used the credit card but received monthly statement showing the transaction over Rs.5,000/-. When the complainant approached the customer care, there was no proper reply.  The complainant also received calls from various collection agents for the alleged due of Rs.5,000/- with abusive language.   The complainant was threatened by the opposite parties that his name will be included in the CIBIL and black listed from availing loans.  Due to such harassment by the collection agents of the opposite parties, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.1,100/- as full and final settlement of his credit card as per Ex.A1.  The opposite parties sent a monthly statement continuously claiming a sum of Rs.10,105.68/- in the month of April 2009 as per Ex.A5.  Hence the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice as per Ex.A2.   Since there was no proper response from the opposite parties, the complainant was constrained to file this case claiming the refund of Rs.1,100/- and a compensation of Rs.25,000/-.  The act of the opposite parties in claiming huge amount without any transaction amounts to deficiency in service.

6.     The contention of the opposite parties is that after accepting the terms and conditions, the complainant availed the credit card facility. The allegation of no transaction by the complainant is absolutely false.  But the opposite parties has not produced any record to prove the transactions by the complainant.   On a careful perusal of Ex.A5, it is apparently clear that the complainant has not transacted using the credit card.  All the figures shown in the statement of a/c are self explanatory related to finance and service charges proves that the complainant has not transacted the credit card.  Further the contention of the opposite parties that the allegation of payment of Rs.1,100/- by the complainant towards full and final settlement of credit card use is absolutely false.  The said payment was made only a part amount due.  But the opposite parties has not produced any record to prove the valid transaction done by the complainant.  Further the contention of the opposite parties is that if there are dues to the bank and there is a default in payment, the matter will be referred to CIBIL.  But in this case, the complainant has not transacted by using the credit card proves deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.  Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties shall return /refund a sum of Rs.1,100/- with a  compensation of Rs.10,000/- with cost of Rs.5,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.  The opposite parties 1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to refund a sum of Rs.1,100/- (Rupees One thousand and hundred only) and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. to 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 07^th day of August 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	14.04.2009	Copy of receipt issued to the complainant
Ex.A2	17.05.2009	Copy of legal notice issued by the complainant
Ex.A3	22.05.2009	Copy of the acknowledgement card
Ex.A4	27.06.2009	Copy of letter issued by the Standard Chartered Bank
Ex.A5		Copy of Statement of Accounts

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT