Delhi

New Delhi

CC/832/2010

S.F. Ahmed & Anr. - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Hong Kong And Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

 

                  CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

                                            ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

                                             I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC. 832/2010                                Dated:

In the matter of:

1. Mr. S.F. Ahmed,

          S/o Mr. Zahir Ahmed,

           R/o 81-A, Pkt.-A, Sukhdev Vihar,

          New Delhi-25.

 

2. Mr. Zahir Ahmed,

S/o Mr. Abdul Majid,

R/o  80, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi-25.

                           ……..COMPLAINANTS

VERSUS

The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking

Corpn. Ltd., Barakhamba Road,

Connaught Place, New Delhi.

Through its Chief Manager.

                        Opposite Parties

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant had taken visa gold credit card no. 438459999610760 from the OP bank and had been using the credit card. To clear one bill of Rs. 25,258/-, the complainant issue a cheque bearing no. 399140 dated 26/11/2005. The OP bank presented the cheque for encashment on 22-23/11/2005 i.e. before the date for which the cheque was drawn, resulting in the dishonour of the same. The OP started sending the bill after adding late payment charges, service tax, interest charges etc. on the dishonour of the cheque in question. The complainant filed an earlier compliant against OP seeking the relief for waiving of all the charges charged by OP alongwith with the direction to the OP to settle the account.

2.     The Ld. District Forum after hearing the parties passed the order dated 27/08/2009, thereby, giving the direction to the OP to charge only Rs. 25,258/- from the complainant and waived rest of the amount shown in the bill, besides this the Ld. District Forum also awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation cost in favour of the complainant.

3.     The OP instead of complying the order preferred an appeal before Hon’ble State Commission and the Ld. State Commission has been pleased to upheld the order of Ld. District Forum vide its order dated 02/12/2009.

4.     The OP bank instead of complying the order adopted coercive method by sending inflated and illegal bill under various heads. The OP also issue a legal notice dated 07/01/2010 demanding Rs. 01,60,832.77/-. The OP also threatened the complainant to share his name and particular with CIBIL, moreover, the complainant also received notice dated 10/02/2010 from the Lok Adalat for settlement. Aforesaid conduct of the OP causes mental pain and harassment as well as loss of reputation. Hence, this complaint.

5. Complaint has been contested by OP.  OP filed its written statement and stated that in compliance of the order of Ld. District Forum dated 27/08/2009 a pay order bearing no. 026105 for a sum of Rs. 44,742/- has been dispatched to the complainant on 02/07/2010, the same was duly received by the complainant on 05/07/2010. It is further stated that due to inadvertent technical glitch, the outstanding of the card account was not reversed in past, but the same has now been processed for reversal and the complainant had no more dues payable on the credit card in question

        6.     Both the parties have filed their evidence by way of affidavit.  

        7.     We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the record.

8. Some facts are not disputed by the parties such as the credit card in question, the order passed by the Ld. District Forum and upheld by Hon’ble State Commission. It is also not disputed that the OP had made payment of Rs. 44,742/- to the complainant in the month of July,2010. The OP in its written statement itself admitted that due to inadvertent technical glitch, the outstanding of the card account in question was not reversed in past, but the same has been processed for reversal now and the complainant had no more dues payable on the credit card in question.

9. Perusal of the file shows that despite the orders of Ld. District Forum and Hon’ble State Commission, OP continuously sent the inflated bill to the complainant against the credit card in question. The OP did not stop here and further sent legal demand notice dated 07/01/2010 to the complainant claiming the illegal demand of Rs. 01,60,832.77/- alongwith the threatening to the complainant to share his name and particular with CIBIL. The OP also sent notice dated 10/02/2010 through Lok Adalat for settling the dues on the credit card in question despite the facts that the dispute regarding the outstanding of credit card in question was already dealt with by the Ld. District Forum and Hon’ble State Commission vide their orders dt. 27.8.2009 and 2.12.2009. This act of OP causes mental agony and pain to the complainant for which OP is held guilty.

    

 

10. In view of the above discussion, we direct OP to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 20,000/- on account of pain and mental agony suffered by him, with the above direction the present complaint is disposed off.

This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. File be consigned to Record Room.

 

Announced in open Forum on  07/01/2020.            

                                                              

                                            (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                     PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                  (H M VYAS)

                    MEMBER                                                          MEMBER