Date of Filing: 24.03.2008 Date of Order: 23.06.2008 BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20 Dated: 23rd DAY OF JUNE 2008 PRESENT Sri. Bajentri H.M, B.A, LL.B., President Smt.C.V. Rajamma, B.Sc., LL.B., PGDPR, Member Sri. M. Nagabhushana, B.Com, LL.B., Member COMPLAINT NO. 746 OF 2008 Sri. Younus, No.8/1A, Ist Cross, Hosahalli Main Road, BANGALORE-560 026. . Complainant. -V/s- Mr. Rajesh, Manager, Credit, HSBC Bank, Opp. Ramakrishna Mutt, Gandhi Bazar, BANGALORE. . Opposite Party. ORDER The complainant was holding credit card No. 5548 3700 0888 5092 of the opposite party HSBC Bank and was making payment on monthly basis. On 10.07.2004 the Bank gave settlement for Rs.16,000/- and informed that, the letter will be given after the payment of the said amount. Thereafter between 14.08.2004 and 11.02.2005 he paid total sum of Rs.13,000/- in monthly installments as detailed in the complaint. After the 6th payment namely 11.02.2005 the Bank did not come to collect the seventh installment even after the request. From 20.12.2007 onwards the Bank is demanding to pay Rs.20,000/- immediately otherwise it will charge Rs.60,000/-. He has no capacity to arrange for the big amount of Rs.20,000/-. Hence the complaint for justice. 2. In the version the contention of the opposite party HSBC Bank is as under:- The complainant has failed to set out any grounds for grant of any relief of whatsoever nature. The allegations in the complaint do not establish deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. The total amount outstanding in the account of the complainant is as per the contractual obligations and the complainant cannot force the opposite party to accept the amount as per his offer. At no time the Bank had agreed to settle the amount outstanding in the credit card account of the complainant for lesser amount. The Bank never demanded more than the outstanding amount. After making use of the credit card and availing the services of the Bank the complainant is offering lesser amount and the Bank is not bound to accept the same. The Bank offers all settlements in writing on its letter head. Failure to produce such offer proves that the Bank had never offered any settlement amount lesser than the outstanding one to the complainant. The complainant is required to pay the amount used by him under the credit card transaction. Therefore, the complainant is not a consumer and as such, not entitled to the relief. 3. In support of the respective contentions, both the parties have filed affidavits. Heard arguments on both sides. 4. The points for consideration are:- (1) Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? (2) Whether the complainant entitled to any relief? 5. Our findings on the above points are in the Negative for the following:- REASONS POINT Nos. 1 & 2:- 6. At the outset we may point out that the allegation in the complaint do not disclose any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. Though the complainant claims that on 10.07.2004 the Bank settled the amount due and payable under the credit card account at Rs.16,000/- no supporting material is produced. It is the contention of the opposite party that all settlements will be made in writing on the letter-head of the Bank. No such document is produced by the complainant disclosing that the Bank had offered to accept payment of Rs.16,000/- towards full and final settlement of the amount due under the credit card account of the complainant. In the absence of such material the very contention of the complainant that, the Bank had offered to receive Rs.16,000/- in full and final settlement of the amount due in the account itself cannot be accepted. Assuming for the sake of argument that the Bank had made such an offer on 10.07.2004, admittedly the complainant paid only Rs.13,000/- between 14.08.2004 and 11.02.2005 as disclosed in the complaint. Therefore the complainant has not even complied with the settlement offered by the Bank. It is also difficult to believe the contention of the complainant that officials of the Bank used to come to his residence to collect the amount. Nothing is produced to show that there was such an agreement between the parties. If at all the officials of the Bank failed to collect the amount from the complainant, nothing prevented the complainant to go the Bank and make payment. The complainant has produced the monthly statement for the period from 16.06.2005 to 15.07.2005. In this statement the total amount due is shown as Rs.24,500/-. Through this statement the complainant was also informed that, his card account has been closed and in case the complainant had the card in his possession, the same shall be destroyed by cutting through the card number. The complainant was also advised to remit the outstanding balance in full immediately. It is not the case of the complainant that subsequent to the above statement he made any payment towards his credit card account. Having failed to pay the outstanding balance in his credit card account the complainant cannot allege deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party Bank. Thus we find no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and therefore hold that, the complainant is not entitled to any relief. In the result, we pass the following:- ORDER 1. The complaint is dismissed. 2. Send a copy of this order to both the parties free of costs immediately. 3. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 23rd DAY OF JUNE 2008. MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Consumer Court Lawyer
Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.
