Tamil Nadu

StateCommission

A/64/2017

SBI Card Payment and Service ,Rep. by its Manager - Complainant(s)

Versus

N.K.Kothari & Ors. - Opp.Party(s)

M/s. K.Mohandass

29 May 2023

ORDER

IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.

 

Present:   Hon’ble THIRU JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH  : PRESIDENT

                 THIRU R  VENKATESAPERUMAL          :    MEMBER

F.A. No. 64/2017

(Against the order passed in C.C. No.290/2007 dated 26.11.2008 on the file of the D.C.D.R.C., Chennai (North))

Thursday, the 29^th day of May 2023

SBI Cards and Payments Services Pvt. Ltd.,

Represented by its Manager,

Tower C, 12^th Floor, Block 2,

Building 3, Infinity Towers,

DLF Cyber City,

Gurgaon,

Haryana – 122 002.                  .. Appellant / 3^rd Opposite Party.

- Vs –

1. NK Kothari (Deceased),

Kothari House,

New No.43, Old No.22,

Narasimhapuram,

Chennai – 600 004.                     .. 1^st Respondent/ Complainant.

 

2. The Chief General Manager,

SBI Credit Card Payments,

No.21, Rajaji Salai,

Chennai – 600 001.

 

3. The Managing Director,

GE Capital Business Process

Management Services Pvt. Ltd.,

4^th Floor, TIAM House,

No.72, Rajaji Salai,

Chennai – 600 001.

 

4. The General Manager,

SBI Cards & Payments Services Pvt. Ltd.,

PO Bag No.28, GPO,

New Delhi – 110 001.

                     .. Respondents 2 to 4 / Opposite parties 1, 2 & 4.

 

5. Mrs. Chandraprabha Kothari,

W/o. Late NK Kothari,

Kothari House,

New No.43, Old No.22,

Narasimhapuram,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

6. Mr. Nishant Kothari,

S/o. Late NK Kothari,

Kothari House,

New No.43, Old No.22,

Narasimhapuram,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

7. Mrs. Divya Kothari,

D/o. Late NK Kothari,

Kothari House,

New No.43, Old No.22,

Narasimhapuram,

Chennai – 600 004.

 

8. Mrs. Amirtha Kothari,

D/o. Late NK Kothari,

Kothari House,

New No.43, Old No.22,

Narasimhapuram,

Chennai – 600 004. 

                 ... Proposed Respondents 5 to 8 / Complainants 2 to 5.

 

 

Counsel for Appellant / 3^rd Opposite Party       : M/s. K. Mohandas

 

Counsel for the Respondents 6 to 8 /

Opposite parties 1, 2 & 4                               : M/s. A. Kavitha

 

1^st Respondent/ Complainant                         : Deceased

 

2^nd to 5^th Respondent / Complainants 2 to 5

(LRs of the Deceased Complainant                  : 

                The 1^st Respondent (Deceased) as complainant had filed a complaint before the District Commission against the opposite parties praying for certain directions.  The District Commission had passed an ex-parte order, allowing the complaint. Against the said ex-parte order, this appeal is preferred by the 3^rd opposite party praying to set aside the order of the District Commission dt. 26.11.2008 in C.C. No.290/2007.

 

                This petition came before us for hearing finally, today and upon hearing the arguments of the Appellant, perusing the documents, lower court records and the order passed by the District Commission, this Commission made the following order in the open court.

ORDER

 

JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH ,  PRESIDENT  (Open court)

 

        1.  The 3^rd opposite party before the District Commission is the appellant herein.

 

        2. The case of the complainant (Deceased) before the District Commission is that he was a businessman and he was issued with a Gold Credit card bearing No.4006676015207775.  On 18.01.2007, the complainant availed a loan for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with the credit card which was interest free for 45 days.   To the shock of the complainant, he came to know from the statement dt.01.02.2007 that an amount of Rs.32,000/- was included as a debit charge.  In this regard, the complainant enquired with the opposite party several times but no concrete reply was given by them.  Hence on 03.03.2007 even before the expiry of 45 days, the complainant has paid the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the opposite party towards closure of the loan and the same was encashed on 05.03.2007.  Despite closure of the loan, the opposite party debited an amount of Rs.9,666.67 towards monthly EMI for the months of March, April & May 2007.   After repeated requests and demands, an amount of Rs.24,927.54 was credited as per the Statement dt.01.05.2007.    But the opposite party levied various kinds of charges to the tune of Rs.71,295.59 but credited only a sum of Rs.24,927.54.   Further, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.16,000/- vide cheque No.759214 dt.12.11.2007 to the opposite party ‘Under Protest’.  Therefore, the complainant sent a legal notice dt. 11.09.2007 demanding the balance amount of Rs.45,875/- + Rs.16,000/-.  Thus, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties, the complainant has filed the complaint before the District Commission claiming refund of the sum of Rs.45,875/- which was wrongly debited by the opposite parties, to pay a sum of Rs.16,000/- paid by the complainant to the opposite party ‘Under Protest’ and to pay a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and business loss and cost of the proceedings to the complainant.

 

        3.     The opposite parties have not filed written version and they were set ex-parte.  Consequently, the District Commission passed an ex-parte order directing the opposite parties, jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.45,875/- which was wrongly debited by the opposite parties, to pay a sum of Rs.16,000/- which was paid by the complainant to the opposite parties under protest, to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for mental agony and tension, to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- towards the loss of his business and to pay the cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.

 

        4.     Aggrieved over the said order, this appeal is preferred by the 3^rd opposite party praying for setting aside the order and for a chance to contest the case on merits. 

 

        5.     Before this Commission, the counsel for the appellant /3^rd opposite party submitted that there is no deficiency of service on their part.  The entire allegations in the complaint were not against the appellant / 3^rd opposite party and only against other opposite parties.  But the District Commission has passed an order against all the opposite parties including the appellant / 3^rd opposite party.  Therefore, they sought to set aside the order of the District Commission and prayed for an opportunity to contest the case on merits.

 

 

        5. When the case had come up before this Commission on 16.05.2023, after hearing the submission of the appellant, this Commission had felt that there is some force in the arguments of the counsel for the appellant / 3^rd opposite party and therefore, in order to give a chance to the 3^rd opposite party to agitate their right on merits, was inclined to allow this appeal by remanding the matter to the District Commission, to dispose of the case on merit.   However, considering the lethargic attitude of the 3^rd opposite party in not appearing before the District Commission, we imposed a cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to the Legal Aid Account of the State Commission on or before 26.05.2023.  Today, when the matter appeared in the list it was reported that the condition imposed by this Commission has been complied with.    Hence, this appeal is allowed today by remanding back the complaint to the District Commission for fresh disposal according to law. 

 

         In the result, the appeal is allowed by setting aside the order of the District Commission, Chennai (North) in C.C. No.290/2007 dt.26.11.2008, and the matter is remanded back to the District Commission, Chennai (North) for fresh disposal according to law and on merits.

 The District Commission is directed to dispose of the complaint within three months from the date of appearance, according to law and on merits.

The amount deposited by the appellant / 3^rd opposite party shall remain in the custody of this Commission, till the disposal of the original complaint.

 

 

 

 

   R  VENKATESAPERUMAL                                                                                            R. SUBBIAH

                 MEMBER                                                                                                              PRESIDENT

 

 

Index :  Yes/ No

 

 

 

KIR/SCDRC/Chennai/Orders/May/2023.