F.A.354  OF  2012  with

 F.A. 309 OF 2012

                 Heard learned counsel for  both the sides.

2.              This appeals are  filed  U/S-15 of erstwhile  Consumer Protection Act,1986(herein-after called the Act). Hereinafter, the parties to these appeals shall be referred to  with reference to their respective status before the learned District Forum. Both the appeals are disposed of  with a common order.

3.                   The factual matrix leading to the      case of the complainant is that the complainant has obtained credit card facility  with maximum limit of Rs.25,000/- from  OP No.1 and also he has also S/B account opened  with OP No.2. It is alleged inter-alia that the OPs had made a purchase  on 9.1.2008  to pay Rs.10,000/-  against the credit card account  and accordingly paid the money on 18.3.2008 on receipt of a  money receipt wherein it has been mentioned  full and final settlement of the account. It is further alleged  that the complainant received another notice on 27.5.2009 stating that he has  got S/B account   having Rs.32,899/- but same has been dropped due to outstanding dues of Rs.40,485.38 against the  said credit card account. Thereafter the complainant made request to the OP to clarify  why Rs.32,899/- was deducted but no amount made.  Finding no other way,  the complaint was filed.

4.            The OP    filed written version stating he sent  a settlement letter  on 9.1.2008   on the condition to clear Rs.10,000/- by 18.3.2008 failing which the settlement offer would  be invalid. Since, the amount was not paid, within such time  as per  Section-171 of the Contract Act , outstanding  of Rs.40,485/- was recovered from his S/B account. On the otherhand, they have recovered only Rs.32,899/- from the S/B account of the complainant.  Therefore, they have no deficiency in service on the part of the OP.  

.5.                       After hearing both the parties, learned District Forum   passed the following order:-

               Xxxx              xxxx              xxxx

                                “ In the result, the complaint is hereby allowed on contest against the Ops. All the Ops are hereby jointly & severally  directed to refund the entire amount of Rs.32,899/- to the complainant, issue NDC/NOC  in respect of the credit card bearing No.436771009839672. Compensation for mental agony is assessed at Rs.2000/- and litigation cost is fixed at Rs.1000/- payable by the Ops jointly & severally to the complainant. The order be complied with by the Ops within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order, failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute the same against the Ops in accordance with law. “

6.                Learned counsel for the appellant  in F.A.354 of 2012 submitted that   learned District Forum has committed error in law by not  following  terms and conditions  of the credit card agreement meant   for the credit card holder. He also submitted that as there was outstanding of Rs.32,899/- against the credit card account of complainant,  they have realized  same but learned District Forum has  failed to apply judicial mind to the fact and law involved in this case. According to him, the credit card holder has always accounts  link with  of account holder at Bank  at different times and accordingly after the money being utilized, the expenditure is debited from the S/B account or any other account of complainant.   Since, the amount has not been settled within a time limit, OP  have charged the amount  from the S/B account by applying Section-171 of the Indian Contract Act. So, he submitted to set-aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

7.             Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that he has filed the appeal vide F.A. No.304 of 2012  to enhance the compensation amount and submitted that the learned District Forum  has passed the impugned  order  but the  compensation amount is only Rs.2000/- which  should be more. He supports the impugned order.

 8.               Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties,  perused the DFR and impugned order.

9.                       It is admitted fact that  the complainant was a credit card holder having S/B account with OP No.1 & 2 and also credit  card account with Ops. He has also proved Annexure A & B to show that there was demand of Rs.10,000/- vide Annexure-A and he has paid the amount on 18.03.2008 and got the receipt vide Annexure-B  with ‘full and final for settlement’ of the account. But the OP took the plea  that there is outstanding of Rs.40,485/- for which they deducted 32,899/- from his account. Once there is  statement for ‘full and final settlement’ any demand  must be proved by the OP. But the  OP has not proved same  because  neither any document of purchase or purpose of such expenditure  proved   and same  fairly conceded by the learned counsel for the respondent.        

10.              In view of aforesaid discussion, we are of  view that there is no error in judgment and  we found no reason to interfere  with the impugned order and accordingly the impugned order  is confirmed.

                Both the appeals are disposed of accordingly. No cost.

                  Free copy of the order be supplied to the respective parties or they may download same from the confonet  or webtsite of this  Commission to treat same as copy of order received from this Commission.  

                 DFR be sent back forthwith.