Delhi

East Delhi

CC/628/2015

RAJIV GAUTAM - Complainant(s)

Versus

PNB - Opp.Party(s)

28 May 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO. 628/15

 

 

Shri Rajiv Gautam

R/0 28A, Neelkanth Apartment

46, I.P. Extension, Patparganj

New Deli – 110 092                                                     ….Complainant

 

Vs.    

 

Punjab National Bank

CGHS Patparganj,

In front of St. Andrews School

New Delhi - 110 092                                                        …Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 20.08.2015

Judgement Reserved on: 28.05.2018

Judgement Passed on: 29.05.2018

 

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By: Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

            This complaint has been filed by Shri Rajiv Gautam against Punjab National Bank (OP) under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with allegations of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service. 

2.         The facts in brief are that complainant Rajiv Gautam got issued credit card of Punjab National Bank (OP).  Their executive got the form filled and did not supply the terms and conditions.  He was shocked to know that a sum of Rs. 10/- had been debited in his account on 10.03.2015 at 4.40 p.m.  He immediately made a call to the customer care of OP and was told that a total amount of Rs. 19,500/- had been debited to his account at around 4.45 p.m.  He contacted OP and blocked his credit card.  Their officer assured that the disputed amount will be reversed within 45 days, but they did not do so. 

            He has further stated that he had paid all dues of the credit card, but they have been sending the statement in arbitrary manner.  This act of OP has been stated to be unlawful and a case of deficiency in service.  Thus, he has prayed that OP be directed to send the correct statement and pay compensation of Rs. 80,000/- on account of harassment, mental agony and pain and Rs. 15,000/- as cost of litigation.

3.         In the reply filed on behalf of Punjab National Bank (OP), they have stated that complainant have concealed the proof and correct facts.  It has been stated that transaction for an amount of Rs. 19,500/- of dated 10.03.2015 on the credit card no.4197890000120849 of the complainant was made through POS-90 transaction i.e. card was physically present and swiped at the POS terminal of merchant M/s. Nisha Garments and entered the pin.  On receiving the said transaction dispute form of the complainant, OP raised retrieval request with VISA for the transaction charge slip and the acquiring bank of the merchant i.e. M/s. Nisha Garments provided the copy of the charge slip and the same was sent to the complainant alongwith the letter of dated 27.06.2015. 

            They have further stated that there has been involvement of multiple bank/institutions in any credit card transaction and they have to abide by the guidelines issued by the settlement agency i.e. VISA and as per VISA dispute resolution guidelines, there was no liability of merchant and acquiring bank, if they provided copy of signed charge slip of the disputed POS-90 transaction. 

            The complainant was the only person aware with the PIN of his credit card.  He successfully completed the transaction and now wants to take the advantage of his own wrong. 

            It has further been stated that acquiring bank of the merchant i.e. M/s. Nisha Garments and merchant M/s. Nisha Garments are being the transacting bank and shall be the necessary party.  They have not been impleaded as party.  They have the authority to debit the designated amount of the card holder for all transactions effected by using the credit card as evidenced by bank’s record which was conclusive and binding on the card holder in terms of “TERMS & CONDITIONS” of the PNB’s Credit Card and Application Form of PNB’s Credit Card”.  The transaction made on 10.03.2015 was successful.  Thus, they have denied other facts and have denied their liability also.

4.         The complainant has filed evidence by way of affidavit where he has examined himself.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the complaint. 

            OP have examined Shri Upendra Singh, Senior Manager of OP, who have also deposed on affidavit.  He has narrated the facts which have been stated in the written statement.  He has got exhibited documents such as copy of letter dated 27.06.2015 alongwith annexures (Ex.RW-1/1 colly.) and copy of application for PNB’s credit card (Ex.RW-1/2 colly.).

6.         We have heard the complainant and counsel for OP and have perused the material placed on record.   It has been argued on behalf of OP that the transaction was successful and there was no liability of the bank.

            On the other hand, complainant has stated that he did not make any transaction and bank have arbitrarily debited the amount.

            To appreciate the arguments of complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP, a look has to be made to the testimony of complainant as well as      Shri Upendra Singh, Senior Manager of Punjab National Bank (OP) and the documents placed on record. 

            If the credit card statement of PNB is looked into, it is noticed that an amount of Rs. 19,500/- has been shown as a transaction made on 10.03.2015 at M/s. Nisha Garments, Mumbai.  This amount of Rs. 19,500/- has also been shown where the credit card has been used i.e. of J&K Bank, M/s. Nisha Garments.  When this transaction has been made at J&K Bank, Punjab National Bank have to debit the amount for which their credit card was used.  The collecting bank, J&K Bank have collected the amount on behalf of M/s. Nisha Garments which Punjab National Bank, the card issue bank, was obliged to remit the amount when the transaction has been made.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of Punjab National Bank as they have debited the amount of Rs. 19,500/- as per the command of J&K Bank which has acted on behalf of M/s. Nisha Garments. 

            Thus, we are of the opinion that no case of any deficiency has been made out on the part of Punjab National Bank (OP).    Hence, the complaint of the complainant deserves its dismissal and the same is dismissed.  There is no order as to cost. 

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

       Member                                                                             Member    

 

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                   President