Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/95/2015

M/s.Zebronics India Pvt Ltd., - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s.Axis Bank - Opp.Party(s)

N.Karthikeyan

20 Sep 2017

ORDER

 

                                                            Complaint presented on:  13.04.2015

                                                                Order pronounced on:  20.10.2017

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (NORTH)

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

 

        PRESENT: THIRU.K.JAYABALAN, B.Sc., B.L.,        PRESIDENT

              THIRU. M.UYIRROLI KANNAN B.B.A., B.L.,      MEMBER - I

 

FRIDAY THE 20^th  DAY OF OCTOBER 2017

 

C.C.NO.95/2015

 

 

M/S. Zebronics India Pvt. Ltd.,

(Formerly Known as “Topnotch Infotronix (India) P Ltd”)

rep. by its Authorised Signatory,

No.6C, Valliammal Road,

Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

 

                                                                                    ….. Complainant

 

..Vs..

M/s. AXIS Bank,

rep. by its Branch Manager,

57, Purasawalkam High Road,

Pursawalkam,

Chennai – 600 007.

.....Opposite Party

Date of complaint                                 : 16.06.2015

Counsel for Complainant                      : Mr.N.Karthikeyan

Counsel for Opposite Party                      : M/s.R.Palani Kumar Ramesh,

                                                                 R.Venkata Varathan

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY PRESIDENT THIRU. K.JAYABALAN B.Sc., B.L.,

This complaint is filed by the complainant to refund the sum of Rs.4,57,563/- towards excessive debit from the complainant account and also to pay compensation for mental agony with cost of the complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.1986.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainant company had a cash credit account with the opposite party/ bank and it was being operated from the year 2006. During the course of the business of the complainant, the opposite party used to present several cheques per day and each return and unpaid cheque charged a sum of Rs.50/-. During the year 2012 the complainant noticed his account that amount was debited multiple headings like speed clearing charges, RTGS transfer, mortgage charge creation and valuation charges etc.,

          2. The complainant sent an e-mail dated 23.05.2013 asking the split up of the charges. On 05.08.2013 the opposite party for the first time gave the split up figures. Ongoing through the account it was found that a sum of Rs.500/-  was being debited towards service tax as cheque  return charges from 15.12.2011. The revised amount of Rs.500/- is 10 times of previous charge of Rs.50/-.

3. The circular was effective from 17.08.2009 onwards. The said circular was not brought to the knowledge of the complainant till he sent mail dated 23.05.2013. This opposite party collected the revised charges only from 15.12.2011 and not from 17.08.2009.  This shows that the circular is not applicable to this complainant. The claim of the opposite party is that the debiting was automated system is absurd that how it was done suddenly from 15.12.2011.  Due to the irresponsible and inefficient manner of handling the accounts, the complainant suffered a loss of Rs.4,57,563/- under the heading of handling charges for returned  cheques. When the opposite party have not followed the circular and debited from the account of the complainant suddenly it amounts to negligent and deficiency in service of the opposite party. Hence the complainant filed this complaint to refund the sum of Rs.4,57,563/- towards excessive debit from the complainant account and also to pay compensation for mental agony with cost of the complaint.   

4. WRITTEN VERSION OF THE  OPPOSITE PARTY IN BRIEF:

The opposite party admits that the complainant was holding cash credit account with him from 2006 onwards and the said account was being operated and subsequently the said account was taken over by HDFC Bank on 17.12.2013 and hence the CC Account was closed 08.02.2014.

5. The complainant himself agreed to pay the schedule of the charges as per clause 16  by signing the sanction letter dated 25.02.2011. The periodical charges for each cheque return  and other applicable charges has been debited from the complainant account as per the agreed terms and conditions.  As per the policy decision of the bank, the charges has been revised by this opposite party on 27.07.2009 and the same was applicable to the account of the complainant from 17.08.2009. When the complainant questioned the charges on 23.05.2013, itself shows the facts that he had knowledge about the same and however he has not chosen to clarify the same.

6.   The cause of action is in the year 2012 and therefore the complaint ought to have been filed within a period of two years i.e within 2014. However, the complaint was filed on 05.05.2015 and therefore the compliant barred by limitation. This opposite party acted only as per the terms of contract agreed by the complainant and therefore he has not committed any deficiency in service and prays to dismiss the complaint with cost.

7. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

          1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?

          2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any relief? If so to what extent?

8. POINT NO :1

It is an admitted fact that the complainant had a cash credit account  with the opposite party and it was being operated from the year 2006 and during the course of business a large number of transactions taken in a day and the complainant used to present several cheques in his account and for the returned unpaid cheque, the opposite party charged a sum of Rs.50/- per cheque and from 15.12.2011  onwards, the opposite parties started to debit a sum of Rs.500/- for every return  of cheque and that was questioned by the complainant by sending Ex.A2 e-mail dated 23.05.2013 and further the opposite party issued Ex.A1 revised  charges circular dated 17.08.2009 and thereafter the complainant account  was taken over by the HDFC Bank on 17.12.2013 and after that the opposite party closed the complainant account in Ex.A3 dated 08.02.2014 and thereafter the complainant issued Ex.A4 legal notice and the opposite party issued Ex.A5 reply and thereafter the complainant filed this complaint.

9. The complainant alleged deficiency against the opposite party is that initially only a sum of Rs.50/- was charged for each cheque return and all of a sudden from 15.12. 2011 onwards a sum of Rs.500/- was heavily charged for return of cheque and hence the complained question the same through Ex.A2 e-mail and the opposite party replied that based on Ex.B1 revised charges circular, the said amount was debited and however the said circular was never communicated to the complainant. Further, Ex.B1 is the sanction letter for revising charges dated 25.02.2011 and at least from that date the opposite party should have debited the revised charges and without doing so all of a sudden started deducting only from15.12. 2011 and in that the process an excess debit of Rs.4,57,563/- was debited from  the complainant account and therefore the opposite party had committed deficiency in service by debiting the aforesaid amount.

10. Admittedly the opposite party charged a sum of Rs.50/- to the complainant for every cheque return. The terms and conditions    signed by the complainant and the opposite party/ bank marked as Ex.B1. In that document as per clause 16 the borrower shall pay the charges to the bank as per the banks standard schedule of charges for various services rendered by the bank. Agreeing the clause the complainant signed the terms and conditions.  The charges for cheque return revised to Rs.500/- plus service tax in the schedule of the charges as decided by the central office of the opposite party and the same is available at page 2 of Ex.B2.  Hence the complainant is liable to pay the revised charges of Rs.500/- as per the schedule.

11. The complainant himself filed the revised charges circular dated 17.08.2009. However, the opposite party has given effect for deducting the revised schedule charges only from 15.12.2011. The complainant is maintaining  the account and also depositing cheques almost daily shall aware of the deduction of revised return cheques charges immediately after 15.12.2011. However, the complainant wrote Ex.A2 mail dated 23.05.2013 about the deduction of revised charges nearly after one year and 5 months from the date of deduction. The complainant did not question about the revised schedule deduction of Rs.500/- for one year and five months establishes that he had agreed for the revised schedule charges. The opposite party did not deduct the revised charges from 25.02.2011 and belatedly started deducting from 15.12.2011 is no way committed deficiency to the complainant. Further, the complainant specifically agreed in clause 16 of the terms and conditions that the borrower shall pay the charges levied by the bank, the complainant cannot question that the bank has increased the service charges into several folds. Therefore, in view of the above discussions the opposite party had deducted the cheque return charges and other charges to the complainant only in accordance with the terms and conditions signed by the complainant with the bank and also as per the revised schedule charges and hence, it is held that the opposite party has not committed any deficiency in service.

12. POINT NO:2

Since the Opposite Party has not committed any Deficiency in Service, the Complainant is not entitled for any relief and the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

          In the result the Complaint is dismissed. No costs.

          Dictated to the Steno-Typist transcribed and typed by her corrected and pronounced by us on this 20^th day of October 2017.

 

MEMBER – I                                                                PRESIDENT

 

 

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1 dated 17.08.2009                   Revised Charges Circular

Ex.A2 dated 23.05.2013                   E-mail and Trail mail (Letter series 15 Nos)

Ex.A3 dated 08.02.2014                   Closure of Account

Ex.A4 dated 09.06.2014                   Copy of legal notice to opposite party

Ex.A5 dated 15.07.2014                   Reply notice sent by opposite party

Ex.A6 dated NIL                     Statement of Account provided by the opposite

                                                    Party

 

Ex.A7 dated NIL                     Statement showing the dates and amount of excess

                                                    Charges

 

Ex.A8 dated 30.03.2015                   Certificate of Incorporation (Name changed)

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTY :

 

Ex.B1 dated 25.02.2011                   Renewal and Enhancement of Credit Facilities

 

Ex.B2 dated 25.07.2016                   Consolidated charges in CC account

 

 

 

MEMBER – I                                                               PRESIDENT