BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.46 of 2021

      Date of Instt. 02.02.2021

      Date of Decision: 20.06.2024

Ashwani Aggarwal (aged about 46 years) son of Sh. Kamlesh Aggarwal resident of House No.138, Baba Budha Ji Enclave, P. O. Dakoha, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       Ratnakar Bank Limited (RBL), Model Town Branch, Situated at 265-R, Ground Floor, Model Town, Jalandhar, through its branch manager.

2.       Bajaj Finance Company Situated at SCF-25 & 26, Ground Floor, Urban Estate Phase-I, Near Hotel Golden View, Jalandhar, through its branch manager.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)   

Present:       Sh. A. K. Gupta, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

                   Sh. Ajay Bhardwaj, Adv. Counsel for OP No.1.

                   OP No.2 exparte.

Order

Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the OP No.1 is a banking company engaged in the business of banking services and OP No.2 is a non-banking financial company engaged in the business of providing financial services to its customers. Both the OPs use to adopt different marketing strategies including personal contact with the pretended customers through paid representatives/executives to enhance their customer base and to generate business. In the year 2018 one representative/executive of the OP No.2 met the complainant with the request to apply for a credit card of the OP No.1 being sponsored by OP No.2. At that time the representative of OP No.2 tried to allure the complainant by counting numerous benefits of the credit card being offered by OPs. Though the complainant didn't want to apply for a new credit card, but the OPs through their representative continued to press the complainant for applying credit card and ultimately the complainant was left with no other option except to apply for the same just to get rid from continues requests by their representative subject to the condition that the subjected credit card is not having any hidden charges. Though, the complainant never used the credit card issued by the OPs after 27.12.2019 regarding which complainant paid all his dues vide receipt No.1182752402 dated:27-12-2019, however, despite that the OPs were continuously kept on sending demand messages on the mobile No.9855241458 of the complainant, but without issuing any bill thereof. Being aggrieved from it, the complainant tried to contact the customer care number 08698010101 of the OPs but after a number of attempts, the customer care executive directed the complainant to visit and contact OP No.2 to get redressal of the issue. As per the directions of customer care executive, the complainant visited the office of the OP No.2 and reported his grievance to the branch manager. But to great surprise, the branch manager absolve himself from all the responsibilities in this matter under the pretext that since the credit card in question has been issued by OP No.1, as such, they are unable to help the complainant in any manner and further directed him to approach OP No.1. Having no other option, the complainant had to approach the OP No.1 by personally visiting the Branch, but the executives of OP No.1 namely Ms. Arti Oberoi and Ms. Harneet Kaur after hearing the matter forwarded the complainant to branch manager, who again directed the complainant to visit OP No.2 in this regard. Thus the complainant is being treated as a shuttle cock without any redressal of his grievance. In the meantime, the complainant also contacted the OPs through their official e-mail ID's i.e. cardservices@rblbank.com and supercardservices@rblbank.com and with the request to immediate termination of his credit card services and for supplying of bill qua the demands being raised by the opposite parties through text messages and for supplying of credit card statement. But the OPs even failed in acknowledging the receipt of e-mails, what to say about reply thereof. Despite various visits, phone calls, e-mails when no reply was received from the OPs qua the redressal of the grievance of the complainant, he was constrained to issue a legal notice dated:05-01-2021 through registered A.D./speed post upon the OPs through his counsel calling upon the OPs either to provide complete statement (since inception) of the credit card along with bills for the demand raised by them through text messages apart from permanently termination of credit card services with immediate effect, within a period of seven days from the receipt of the legal notice, with clear instruction that failing which an appropriate legal action will be taken. However, despite receiving the legal notice, the OPs did neither come forward to tender any reply thereof, nor honoured the genuine requests of the complainant for which the OPs are otherwise legally bound to do so. Meaning thereby that the OP's are using deceptive, restrictive and unfair trade practices to enrich themselves at the cost of complainant without providing any services for the amount being arbitrarily charged by them. After receiving the legal notice, the OPs started harassing the complainant by pushing demand messages more frequently then as they used to do earlier. Moreover, the recovery agents of the OPs telephonically contacted to pay the requisite amount as per demand messages with threatening to the affect that in case the requisite amount was not paid then the complainant have to face dire consequences in the form of negative CIBIL score. The aforesaid acts of the OPs are nothing else but clear-cut negligence on their part in providing services to the complainant and it also amounts to deceptive, restrictive and unfair trade practices, for which both the OPs are liable jointly and severally and as such, the present complaint filed with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may kindly be accepted and OP be directed to declare the demand of OPs to deposit a sum of Rs.2133.94 in lieu of use of credit card in question is illegal, arbitrary and is not justified at all. Further, OPs be directed to terminate the credit card of the complainant without any further delay. Further, OPs be directed to pay an award for a sum of Rs.4,95,000/- as compensation for causing mental harassment to the complainant and for cost of legal proceedings be announced in favour of the complainant.

2.                 Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, but despite service OP No.2 failed to appear and ultimately, OP No.2 was proceeded against exparte, whereas OP No.1 appeared through its counsel and filed written reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking by taking preliminary objections that the complainant is not a consumer as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act as the credit card of the complainant has been blocked as per the request of the complainant and the outstanding amount has been waived and complete outstanding has been zeroized on his card account as a onetime service gesture and the credit will reflect in his next statement dated April 12, 2021. The said waiver has been intimated to the Customer vide an email dated 30.03.2021. Therefore, the OP/respondent no.1 is not providing any services to the complainant nor the complainant is availing of any services and such the complaint is not maintainable. It is further averred that there are intricate questions of law and facts are involved in the present case and as such the present complaint is not maintainable and consequently the present complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that no cause of action accrued to the complainant against the OP/respondent no.1. The complainant has always been kept updated regarding the amount that is payable by him and no excess amount has ever been received or demanded by the OP/respondent no.1 and as such he cannot show ignorance to the said knowledge about the facts. Moreover when the complainant has settled the matter with the OP/respondent no.1 and his request for waiver of the amount has already been acceded to by the OP/respondent no.1 and the OP/respondent no.1, by way of goodwill and service gesture, took a lenient view of the default and reversal was given against the outstanding charges and now No Dues are shown against the credit card of the complainant as on date, there is no reason or ground to file the present complaint. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the OP has provided the services to the complainant in most efficient and diligent manner and there is no deficiency or negligence on the part of the OP No.1 in providing services to the complainant, therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed. It is further averred that the complainant is guilty of suppressing and withholding material facts from this Commission and as such, he is not entitled to any relief in the present case. On merits, it is admitted that the OP No.1 is a banking company and provides various banking services to customers as per the rules and regulations and criteria fixed by the bank from time to time, but the other allegations as made in the complaint by the complainant are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant and counsel for the OP No.1 very minutely.

6.                The case of the complainant is that complainant purchased credit card of OP No.1 being sponsored by OP No.2. At that time, the representative of OP No.2 tried to allure the complainant by counting numerous benefits of credit card and promised by the OP No.2 that there will not be any hidden charges, though the complainant never used the credit card after 27.12.2019 and he paid all the dues upto 27.12.2019 vide receipt no.1182752402 dated 27.12.2019. Same was acknowledged by OP vide Ex.C-1. However, the OPs continuously kept on sending demand, messages on the complainant’s mobile without issuing any bill thereof. Being aggrieved of it, after trying many times on customer care number of the OPs, the complainant contacted the customer executive on whose direction complainant visited the office of OP No.2, but the branch manager of OP No.2 absolved himself from all the responsibilities in this matter under the pretext that card is issued by OP No.1 so, complainant should go to OP No.1. The complainant visited branch office of OP No.1 and met Ms. Arti Oberoi and Ms. Harneet Kaur, who directed him to meet branch manager and again Branch Manager directed the complainant to visit OP No.2 in this regard, but it was of no use. In the mean time, complainant also contacted OP through their official email IDs